Thomson v. United States

Background

A major railroad, the Chicago & North Western, ran coordinated freight service using rail lines plus twenty-three motor-truck routes alongside its tracks. The trucks carried less-than-carload freight in close coordination with train schedules. The railroad contracted with independent motor operators, loaded trucks at railroad stations, issued the shipping manifests, and used its own bills and tariffs so shippers could not tell whether rail or truck would move their goods. The Interstate Commerce Commission denied the railroad a "grandfather" motor-carrier certificate and the railroad sued.

Reasoning

The Court had to decide who qualified for the grandfather certificate: the railroad that offered a single unified service or the separate truck operators. The Court said the statutory meaning covers anyone who holds itself out to the public as providing a single transportation service, and it relied on Congress's intent not to award multiple grandfather rights for one service. Because the railroad held itself out as offering the integrated rail-motor service and exercised tight control over schedules and shipments, the Court concluded the railroad was the motor carrier entitled to the certificate.

Real world impact

The decision gives the railroad the grandfather motor-carrier certificate for the truck routes that are an integral part of its coordinated service and blocks granting duplicate certificates to the independent truck operators for that same traffic. Regulators must treat the railroad as the carrier for those routes, which affects who sets rates and who is responsible to shippers. The case is sent back to the agency for further steps consistent with this ruling; other questions about unrelated truck freight remain open.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices disagreed. Justice Jackson would have affirmed the lower court, and Justice Douglas (joined by Justice Black) would have upheld the Commission’s "control and responsibility" test.