How cited: Cluster 411685 · Go Syfert

Cluster 411685

green · 25 citation events across 4 courts. Showing the 7 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Rule Authority · 7th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
Our decisions in this area of law focus, for the most part, on customary abandonment procedures: a carrier must demonstrate to the ICC that “the present or future public convenience and necessity require or permit the abandonment or discontinuance.” 49 U.S.C. § 10903 (a); see, e.g., Simmons v. ICC, 784 F.2d 242 , 246-48 (7th Cir.1985); Indiana Sugars, 694 F.2d at 1099.
Rule Authority · 7th Cir.
But again the shippers failed to carry their burden of producing evidence after the railroad has produced at least some evidence in its own favor. 8 We have affirmed the Commission's authority to allocate burdens of producing evidence between the proponents and the opponents of abandonment, see, e.g., Simmons v. ICC, 784 F.2d 242, 246 (7th Cir.1985), while noting that the Commission's discretion in this regard is not plenary, see Indiana Sugars, Inc. v. ICC, 694 F.2d 1098, 1…
Rule Authority · 7th Cir.
Conclusion In view of our limited standard of review in abandonment cases, Indiana Sugars, 694 F.2d at 1099-1100, we find that the Commission has not failed in its responsibilities in this case in applying its expertise in weighing the relevant factors bearing on the public interest.
Rule Authority · 7th Cir.
Conclusion In view of our limited standard of review in abandonment cases, Indiana Sugars, 694 F.2d at 1099-1100, we find that the Commission has not failed in its responsibilities in this case in applying its expertise in weighing the relevant factors bearing on the public interest.
Rule Authority · 7th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
As to the tests for abandonment, see Indiana Sugars, 694 F.2d at 1100 [including the trend in Congressional policy in favor of eliminating financial losses and shortening the time for Commission deliberation in abandonment proceedings]; People of the State of Illinois v. I.C.C. and U.S., 709 F.2d 1186, 1191, 1193-94 (7th Cir. 1983); see also 722 F.2d 1341 at 1347. 5 .
Cited · 7th Cir. · signal: see
A number of this circuit’s decisions have suggested that in view of the requirement for some evidentiary support under the arbitrary and capricious standard the difference between the "substantial evidence” and "arbitrary and capricious” standards may be "primarily a semantic distinction.” See, e.g., Central States Enters., Inc. v. ICC, 780 F.2d 664 , 674 n. 10 (7th Cir.1985); see Indiana Sugars, Inc. v. ICC, 694 F.2d 1098 , 1099 (7th Cir.1982); People of the State of Illino…
Cited (see also) · D.C. Cir. · signal: see also
See also Indiana Sugars, Inc. v. ICC, 694 F.2d 1098 , 1101 (7th Cir.1982) (abandonment would “inflict serious hardships” on sugar company that depended on rail for much of its inbound traffic). 3.