Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R. Co. v. Campbell River Mills Co.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Sawtelle, J.
The material facts in the instant case are not in dispute and are well stated in the opinion of the District Court, 42 F.(2d) 775, 776 . They need not be repeated here in full, but an account of the previous litigation is of particular importance:
“In 1924 the plaintiff made complaint to the Department of Public Works of Washington that it was charged in excess of the local tariff rate. The plaintiff also filed complaint with the Interstate Commerce Com.mission, which tentatively reported that the Interstate Commerce Commission had not jurisdietion. Upon hearing before the Department of Public Works of Washington, the department found that, instead of paying $2.19, the local tariff rate, the plaintiff has been required to pay '$2.42½ per thousand feet,” a charge that it found unreasonable and unlawful to the extent of the excess. As no expense bills were filed or produced in the hearing, it was ordered that, if the parties could not agree upon the amount of the refund .accruing to the mill company, a report should be made to the department within sixty days of such disagreement, so that such further orders as might be necessary coúld be filed. “The defendant company thereupon…