FPC v. Metropolitan Edison Co., 304 U.S. 375 (1938)

U.S. Supreme Court, (May 23, 1938)

Docket number: 915

/us/304/375/case.html
Permanent Link: http://supreme.vlex.com/vid/fpc-v-metropolitan-edison-20018939
Id. vLex: VLEX-20018939

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Columbia Nitrogen Corporation and Nipro, Inc., Petitioners, v. Federal Power Commission, Respondent., 559 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1977)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit - Elmer C. Adams, Sr., and Adams Dairy Company, Elmer C. Adams, Jr., and Adams Dairy, Inc., Appellants, v. Federal Trade Commission, Appellee. Federal Trade Commission, Appellant, v. Elmer C. Adams, Sr., and Adams Dairy Company, Elmer C. Adams, Jr., and Adamsdairy, Inc., Appellees., 296 F.2d 861 (8th Cir. 1961) Sr., and Adams Dairy Company, Elmer C. Adams, Jr., and Adams Dairy, Inc., Appellants, v. Federal Trade Commission, Appellee. Federal Trade Commission, Appellant, v. Elmer C. Adams, Sr., and Adams Dairy Company, Elmer C. Adams, Jr., and Adamsdairy, Inc., Appellees.

U.S. Supreme Court - Reisman v. Caplin, 375 U.S. 440 (1964)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit - John Kokajko, D/B/a Voyageurs, Petitioner, v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondents. Central Maine Power Company, Intervenor., 837 F.2d 524 (1st Cir. 1988) D/B/a Voyageurs, Petitioner, v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondents. Central Maine Power Company, Intervenor.

U.S. Supreme Court - Bell v. New Jersey, 461 U.S. 773 (1983)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit - Unpublished Disposition Notice: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(C) States that Unpublished Orders, Judgments, and Explanatory Memoranda May Not Be Cited as Precedents, But Counsel May Refer To Unpublished Dispositions When the Binding or Preclusive Effect of the Disposition, Rather Than Its Quality as Precedent, is Relevant. K N Energy, Inc., Petitioner, v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondent, Great Western Sugar Company, Intervenor., 865 F.2d 1329 (D.C. Cir. 1988) Judgments, and Explanatory Memoranda May Not Be Cited as Precedents, But Counsel May Refer To Unpublished Dispositions When the Binding or Preclusive Effect of the Disposition, Rather Than Its Quality as Precedent, is Relevant. K N Energy, Inc., Petitioner, v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondent, Great Western Sugar Company, Intervenor.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - Frank H. Filice, Appellant, v. Anthony J. Celebrezze, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Appellee., 319 F.2d 443 (9th Cir. 1963)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - Boroughs of Ellwood City, Grove City, New Wilmington, Wampum and Zelienople, Pennsylvania, Petitioners, v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondent, Pennsylvania Power Company, Intervenor., 701 F.2d 266 (3rd Cir. 1983) Grove City, New Wilmington, Wampum and Zelienople, Pennsylvania, Petitioners, v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondent, Pennsylvania Power Company, Intervenor.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit - Michigan Power Company, Petitioner, v. Federal Power Commision, Respondent, Municipal Defense Group, Northern Natural Gas Company, Intervenors., 494 F.2d 1140 (D.C. Cir. 1974) Petitioner, v. Federal Power Commision, Respondent, Municipal Defense Group, Northern Natural Gas Company, Intervenors.

Text:

U.S. Supreme Court FEDERAL POWER COM'N v. METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., 304 U.S. 375 (1938)

[Page 304 U.S. 375, 381]

This Court granted certiorari, 304 U.S. 553, 58 S.Ct. 947, 82 L.Ed . --, and the cause has been argued. We are of the opinion that the Circuit Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction to enter the decree.

First.-There was no order of the Commission before the Circuit Court of Appeals for review. Apart from the question whether the order of January 6, 1936, or that of January 26, 1937, can be regarded as reviewable, no application for such a review had been made.

The provision conferring appellate jurisdiction on the Circuit Court of Appeals i r elation to orders of the Federal Power Commission is found in section 313 of the Federal Power Act, as amended by the Act of August 26, 1935, c. 687, 213, 49 Stat. 860, 861, 16 U.S.C.A. 825l. [Footnote 1] Section 313(a) provides

[Page 304 U.S. 375, 387]

stant case no such application by the Commission has been made. Section 307(c) also provides that any person who willfully fails or refuses to attend and testify, or produce books and papers, in obedience to the subpoena of the Commission, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and be subject to fine and imprisonment. The qualification that the refusal must be 'willful' fully protects one whose refusal is made in good faith and upon grounds which entitle him to the judgment of the court before obedience is compelled.

The Commission's order of January 26, 1937, lay outside any appellate jurisdiction conferred by the statute upon the Circuit Court of Appeals. In that view, section 262 of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C.A. 377, gives no support to the decree under review and its injunction and instructions to the Commission must be regarded as unauthorized.

The decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to dismiss the respondents' petition. It is so ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

Mr. Justice ROBERTS and Mr. Justice CARDOZO took no part in the consideration and decision of this case. Footnotes

Footnote 1 Sec. 313. '(a) Any person, State, municipality, or State commission aggrieved by an order issued by the Commission in a proceeding under this Act (chapter) to which such person, State, municipality, or State commission is a party may apply for a rehearing within thirty days after the issuance of such order. The application for rehearing shall set forth specifically the ground or grounds upon which such application is based. Upon such application the Commission shall have power to grant or deny rehearing or to abrogate or modify its order without further hearing. Unless the Commission acts upon the application for rehearing within thirty days after it is filed, such application may be deemed to have been denied. No proceeding to review any order of the Commission shall be brought by any person unless such person shall have made application to the Commission for a rehearing thereon.'(b) Any party to a proceeding under this Act (chapter) aggrieved by an order issued by the Commission in such proceeding may obtain a review of such order in the Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States for any circuit wherein the licensee or public utility to which the order relates is located or has its principal place of business, or in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, by filing in such court, within sixty days after the order of the Commission upon the application for rehearing, a written petition praying that the order of the Commission be modified or set aside in whole or in part.

A copy of such petition shall forthwith be served upon any member of the Commission and thereupon the Commission shall certify and file with the court a transcript of the record upon which the order complained of was entered. Upon the filing of such transcript such court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to affirm, modify, or set aside such order in whole or in part. No objection to the order of the Commission shall be considered by the court unless such objection shall have been urged before the Commission in the application for rehearing unless there is reasonable ground for failure so to do. The finding of the Commission as to the facts, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive. If any party shall apply to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence, and shall show to the satisfaction of the court that such additional evidence is material and that there were reasonable grounds for failure to adduce such evidence in the proceedings before the Commission, the court may order such additional evidence to be taken before the Commission and to be adduced upon the hearing in such manner and upon such terms and conditions as to the court may seem proper. The Commission may modify its findings as to the facts by reason of the additional evidence so taken, and it shall file with the court such modified or new findings which, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive, and its recommendation, if any, for the modification or setting aside of the original order. The judgment and decree of the court, affirming, modifying, or setting aside, in whole or in part, any such order of the Commission, shall be final, subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification as provided in sections 239 and 240 of the Judicial Code, as amended (U.S.C., Title 28, Secs. 346 and 347).'

Footnote 2 28 U.S.C. 47, 28 U.S.C.A. 47.

Footnote 3 Subdivision (c) of section 307 of the Federal Power Act, as amended by Act Aug. 26, 1935, 213, 16 U.S.C.A. 825f(c), as follows:'(c) In case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey a subpena issued to, any person, the Commission may invoke the aid of any court of the United States within the jurisdiction of which such investigation or proceeding is carried on, or where such person resides or carries on business, in requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of books, papers, correspondence, memoranda, contracts, agreements, and other records. Such court may issue an order requiring such person to appear before the Commission or member or officer designated by the Commission, there to produce records, if so ordered, or to give testimony touching the matter under investigation or in question; and any failure to obey such order of the court may be punished by such court as a contempt thereof. All process in any such case may be served in the judicial district whereof such person is an inhabitant or wherever he may be found or may be doing business. Any person who willfully shall fail or refuse to attend and testify or to answer any lawful inquiry or to produce books, papers, correspondence, memoranda, contracts, agreements, or other records, if in his or its power so to do, in obedience to the subpena of the Commission, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than one year, or both.'

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access