# New Jersey v. United States

> District Court, D. New Jersey · November 25, 1958 · 168 F. Supp. 342

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8727594

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE OF NEW JERSEY and Board of Public Utility Commissioners of The State of New Jersey v. UNITED STATES of America, Interstate Commerce Commission, Erie Railroad Company and New York, Susquehanna and Western Railroad Company
- **Court:** District Court, D. New Jersey
- **Decided:** November 25, 1958
- **Citations:** 168 F. Supp. 342; 1958 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4277
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by McLaughlin
- **Judges:** McLaughlin, Wortendyke
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8727594

## Opinion text

McLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
This is a companion suit to Board of Public Utility Commissioners of New Jersey v. United States of America, 168 F.Supp. 324 in which an opinion of the court was filed today and to which I filed a dissenting opinion.
The cases were heard together and at this stage at least present similar issues of law and fact.
Section 13, paragraphs (1) and (2), controls the situation before us in this litigation as it does in the New York Central case.
The attempted notice of discontinuance by the Erie as part of its Section 13a(1) procedure has the same fatal defect as the New York Central notice.
The deliberate failure of Section 13a (1) to protect the right to be heard of the several states, their subdivisions and their citizens prior to the summary closing out of the Erie ferry system here involved raises a serious constitutional question under the Fifth Amendment.
I dissent from the majority opinion herein for the reasons stated in my New York Central dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8727594. Public record. Not legal advice.