Langhill v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Citations

• 254 Pa. 119
• 98 A. 873
• 1916 Pa. LEXIS 693

Syllabus

<p>Common carriers — Railroad companies — Discrimination — Side tracks — Interstate Commerce Act of Feb. I, 1887, c. 101\\, 84 U. S. Stat. 879, secs. 8, 8 and 9 — Act of June 4, 1888, P. L. 78 — Construction — Intention.</p> <p>1. Sections 8, 9 and 22 of the Interstate Commerce Act relating to unlawful discrimination, construed with the statute as a whole, show that the act was both declaratory and creative. It gave shippers new rights, while at the same time preserving existing causes of action; it did not supersede the jurisdiction of state courts in any case new or old where the decision did not involve the determination of matters calling for the exercise of administrative power and discretion of the commission, or relate to a subject as to which the jurisdiction of the Federal Court had been otherwise made exclusive.</p> <p>2. There are two forms of discrimination, one in the rule and the other in the manner of its enforcement; one in promulgating a discriminatory rule, the other in the unfair enforcement of a reasonable rule. In a suit where the rule of practice itself is attacked as unfair and discriminatory, a question is raised which calls for the exercise of judgment and discretion of the administrative power which has been vested by congress in the Interstate Commerce Commission; until that body has declared the practice to be discriminatory and unjust no court has jurisdiction of a suit against an interstate carrier for damages occasioned by its enforcement. But if the carrier’s rule, fair on its face has been unequally applied, and the suit is for damages occasioned by its violation or discriminatory enforcement, there is no administrative question involved, the court being called on to decide a mere question of fact, as to whether the carrier has violated the rule to plaintiff’s damage; such suit though against the carrier for damages arising in interstate commerce, may be prosecuted either in a State or Federal Court.</p> <p>8. Where a railroad compan