Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Inland Steel Company v. United States…

First. In granting the interlocutory injunction, the District Court proceeded under a jurisdictional Act which provides that '* * * the court, in its discretion, may restrain or suspend, in whole or in part, the operation of the commission's order pending the final hearing and determination of the suit.' [4] Appellant invoked the Court's equity powers. [5]
A Court of equity 'in the exercise of its discretion, frequently resorts to the expedient of imposing terms and conditions upon the party at whose instance it proposes to act.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Inland Steel Company v. United States…

When the Court finally determined that the administrative findings and order were correct, appellant could claim an interest in the fund only by asserting a right to payments forbidden by law, and it became the duty of the Court promptly to allocate the fund to its lawful owner.
An Equity Court having lawful control of a fund, in which there may be interests represented only by a duly authorized governmental agency, has the power and is charged with the duty of protecting those interests in disposing of the fund.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Inland Steel Company v. United States…

The Railroad then republished the old tariff, thus-under court order-restoring the unlawful allowance. When the Court subsequently dismissed appellant's petition and vacated the interlocutory injunction 'in all respects', it thereby found the Commission's report and order valid and they were then in effect as though the injunction had never been granted. Thus, during the period the injunction was pending (save for the first six days) , the published tariff had contained the unlawful allowance solely because of the Court's injunction.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature