TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, National Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

EASTERN AIR LINES, Inc., Petitioner, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, Respondent; NATIONAL AIRLINES, Inc., Petitioner, v. CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, Respondent

Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd., Nat'l Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd., 261 F.2d 830 (2d Cir. 1958)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 4, 1958
Docket
No. 830
Judges
Swan, Medina, Waterman
Citations
261 F.2d 8301958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5440

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

The petitioners have filed petitions for review of the Board’s order of October 2, 1958. That order granted amended certificates of public convenience and necessity which were to become effective on November 29, 1958, but were stayed by the Board through December 6, 1958, so that this court might in the meantime hear and dispose of the petitions for stay presented to it. The granting of the requested stay is opposed by the Board and by the intervening airlines, Northwest, Delta, and Capital.

Section 1006(d) of the Civil Aeronautics Act, 49 U.S.C.A. § 646 (d), authorizes the court to grant a stay “upon good cause shown.” The petitioners also rely upon Section 10(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.A. § 1009 (d).

The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has recently held in Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Association v. Federal Power Commission, D.C.Cir., 259 F.2d 921 , that stay of an order of an administrative agency may be granted when the following conditions are met:

(a) Where the petitioner is likely to prevail on the merits of its appeal;

(b) Where the petitioner has shown that without a stay it will suffer irreparable injury;

(c) Where there is no substantial harm to other interested persons; and (d) Where the public interest will not be harmed.

See also Air Line Pilots Ass’n, International v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 2 Cir., 215 F.2d 122, 125 ; Yakus v.' United States, 321 U.S. 414, 440 , 64 S.Ct. 660 , 88 L.Ed. 834 .

In the interest of expedition it is impossible in the time available before expiration of the Board’s stay to review this complex litigation and state in de *831 tail our reasons for denying the stay. It will suffice to say that we are not persuaded that the requisite conditions for granting the stay are shown to have been met, particularly those listed above as (c) and (d).

Stay denied.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1958: 119582026peak 1958 · 1

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Yakus v. United States, 321 U.S. 414 (1944) 1,616
Va. Petroleum Jobbers Ass'n v. Fed. Power Comm'n, Blue Ridge Gas Co. . Petition for Review of Order of the Fed. Power Comm'n, No. 14583, 259 F.2d 921 (D.C. Cir. 1958) 224
Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Int'l v. Civil Aeronautics Bd., 215 F.2d 122 (2d Cir. 1954) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list