Summary

Louis Brandeis The Chicago Junction Case — Opinion of the Court

If it were conceded that the acquisition of the terminals by the New York Central was in the public interest, I suppose it would not be contended that complainants had any standing to interfere on the ground that their opportunities for obtaining business had been impaired. And, since they are without legal right to intervene to redress a public grievance, the contrary fact that the acquisition will not be in the public interest cannot avail them. Their complaint must stand or fall upon the nature of their own grievance.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis The Chicago Junction Case — Opinion of the Court

Prior to the date of the order, and while the terminal railroads were uncontrolled by any trunk line carrier, they were all served impartially and without discrimination, and they competed for the traffic on equal terms. The order substitutes for neutral control of the terminal railroads, monopoly of control in the New York Central, and, in so doing, necessarily gives to it substantial advantage over all its competitors and subjects the latter to serious disadvantage and prejudice. The main purpose of the acquisition by the New York Central was to secure a larger share of the Chicago business.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis The Chicago Junction Case — Opinion of the Court

Congress by using the phrase 'whenever the Commission is of opinion, after hearing,' prescribed quasi judicial action. [9] Upon application of a carrier, the Commission must form a judgment whether the acquisition proposed will be in the public interest. It may form this judgment only after hearing. [10] The provision for a hearing implies both the privilege of introducing evidence and the duty of deciding in accordance with it. To refuse to consider evidence introduced or to make an essential finding without supporting evidence is arbitrary action.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature