Summary

Louis Brandeis United States v. Griffin — Opinion of the Court

The absence in the Railway Mail Pay Act of a provision for judicial review and the denial of jurisdiction under the Urgent Deficiencies Act do not preclude every character of judicial review. If the Commission makes the appropriate finding of reasonable compensation but fails, because of an alleged error of law, to order payment of the full amount which the railroad believes is payable under the finding, the Court of Claims has jurisdiction of an action for the balance, as the claim asserted is one founded upon a law of Congress.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis United States v. Griffin — Opinion of the Court

But a suit under the Urgent Deficiencies Act to set aside an order concerning mail pay is not primarily one against the Commission. Primarily, it is a suit against the United States. [11] And the United States can be sued only when authority so to do has been specifically conferred. The Railway Mail Pay Act does not confer that authority.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis United States v. Griffin — Opinion of the Court

No provision is made for a judicial review. But provision is made for administrative review by 're-examination' of an order.
'Either the Postmaster General or any such carrier may at any time after the lapse of six months from the entry of the order assailed apply for a re-examination and thereupon substantially similar proceedings shall be had with respect to the rate or rates for service covered by said application, provided said carrier or carriers have an interest therein.' 39 U.S.C. § 553, 39 U.S.C.A. § 553.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature