Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc. v. Shannon/Dissent White

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Opinion of the Court
Dissenting Opinions
Goldberg
White

United States Supreme Court

377 U.S. 311

Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc.  v.  Shannon

 Argued: April 28, 1964. --- Decided: June 1, 1964


Mr. Justice WHITE, dissenting.

I join the dissenting opinion of my Brother GOLDBERG. I add that the Court has failed to demonstrate how appellees' sugar business qualifies as a 'primary' business when it clears only 35 cents per 100 pounds of sugar over and above the cost of the sugar at Supreme, Louisiana. This is less than the normal costs of transportation from Supreme to San Antonio. No one without backhaul capacity could make a viable business out of selling Supreme sugar in the San Antonio market and appellees admit that they are 'backhauling to make a profit.' I therefore cannot view the sugar business as a bona fide primary business to which a private transportation operation is only an incident. It would be more appropriate to say that this catch-as-catch-can sugar business is wholly incidental to an otherwise empty backhaul.

Notes

[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse