# Isbrandtsen Co., Inc. v. United States

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · June 1, 1954 · 211 F.2d 51

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9444097

## Case

- **Full name:** ISBRANDTSEN CO., Inc. v. UNITED STATES Et Al.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** June 1, 1954
- **Citations:** 211 F.2d 51
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Fahy
- **Judges:** Fahy, Prettyman, Bazelon
- **Cited by:** 106 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/9444097

## Opinion text

FAHY, Circuit Judge
(dissenting on juris dictional grounds).
The jurisdiction of this court extends to review of final orders, only, of the Federal Maritime Board. 64 Stat. 1129 , 5 U.S.C.A. § 1032 . I do not think the order of January 21, 1953, is a final one. It (a) denies an application of Isbrandtsen and the Department of Justice requesting the Board to suspend a rate system which the conference was *58 to place in effect, and (b) sets a hearing on protests against the rates. Notwithstanding its recitals I do not construe this order as approving the. rates or as otherwise final.
Assuming that putting the rates into effect by the conference would be unlawful without Board approval and that Is-brandtsen would be injured thereby, equitable relief against the conference and those members of the industry which compose it seems properly to be sought in a District Court. The impact of such rate action by the industry should not in legal contemplation be attributable to this order of the Board so as to make it final for our review. And it seems to me also that we should not construe the limited statutory authority of this court to include the power to enjoin the conference because the Board has refused to issue an order suspending the rates.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9444097. Public record. Not legal advice.