Intrastate Commerce

215 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Mrs. Grace Carrigan v. Sunland-Tujunga Tel. Co. & State of Cal.
  263 F.2d 568· 9th Cir.· 1959-01-28 ·cited 22×
  A district court judge can dismiss a case for failure to state a claim, even if it involves a request for an injunction against a state statute, without convening a three-judge court if no substantial federal question is presented.
• Atl. Co. v. Citizens ICE & Cold Storage Co.
  178 F.2d 453· 5th Cir.· 1949-12-28 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the local price-cutting war substantially affected interstate commerce or constituted an attempt to monopolize, thus reversing the injunction.
• White Motor Co. v. Littleton
  124 F.2d 92· 5th Cir.· 1941-12-12 ·cited 21×
• Elouise Crook v. Bryant
  265 F.2d 541· 4th Cir.· 1959-04-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that an employee whose duties are partly intrastate and partly interstate is completely covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act if the two classes of work are commingled and wages are not distinguished.
• Walling v. Peoples Packing Co., Inc.
  132 F.2d 236· 10th Cir.· 1942-12-16 ·cited 20×
  Employees engaged in slaughtering livestock and removing inedible portions (hides and offal) are engaged in the production of goods for commerce under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
• The State of Fla. ex rel v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. & Seaboard Air Line Ry.
  63 Fla. 274· Fla.· 1912-01-01 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld an order by the state railroad commissioners requiring two interstate railroads to discontinue hauling freight cars on designated passenger trains between Jacksonville and Pensacola. The court rejected the railroads' constitutional challenge that
• State OF Tex. v. United States
  866 F.2d 1546· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the ICC's interpretation of the Motor Carrier Act, while potentially debatable, was a reasonable construction of the law and thus entitled to deference under Chevron.
• Fed. Power Comm'n v. Ariz. Edison Co., Inc.
  194 F.2d 679· 9th Cir.· 1952-02-12 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the Commission properly classified the Company as a "public utility" under the Federal Power Act, and the District Court erred in dismissing the enforcement action based on a lack of jurisdiction.
• Walling v. L. Wiemann Co.
  138 F.2d 602· 7th Cir.· 1943-11-12 ·cited 17×
  Employees of a retailer's warehouse and central office, which exclusively serves its intrastate retail stores, are not covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act because they are not engaged in interstate commerce.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co.
  91 F.2d 790· 9th Cir.· 1937-07-31 ·cited 17×
  The dissenting judge argues that the National Labor Relations Board's assertion of jurisdiction over the entire plant is not justified when less than half of the product enters interstate commerce. The dissent emphasizes the importance of preserving state sovereignty over domesti
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Conover Motor Co.
  192 F.2d 779· 10th Cir.· 1951-11-05 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the respondents' businesses, as retail automobile dealers, affect commerce within the meaning of the Labor Management Relations Act, granting the National Labor Relations Board jurisdiction.
• Brosious v. Pepsi-Cola Co.
  155 F.2d 99· 3d Cir.· 1946-04-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the transactions complained of were not in interstate commerce, did not illegally restrain trade, and that no illegal conspiracy existed between the defendants.
• Walling v. Roland Elec. Co.
  146 F.2d 745· 4th Cir.· 1945-01-03 ·cited 16×
  The company's employees are engaged in the production of goods for commerce and do not qualify for the retail or service establishment exemption under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
• Walling v. Block
  139 F.2d 268· 9th Cir.· 1943-11-19 ·cited 16×
  Employees working in a central warehouse and office distributing goods to retail stores are excluded from the Fair Labor Standards Act by Section 13(a)(2) if the greater part of the selling of the retail establishments is in intrastate commerce.
• Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Moore
  186 So. 210· Fla.· 1938-04-28 ·cited 16×
  A railroad switchman injured while boarding a passenger car sued Atlantic Coast Line Railroad for damages. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the jury verdict and remanded for a new trial, holding that the declaration must clearly allege whether recovery is sought under state or
• Creamette Co. v. Conlin
  191 F.2d 108· 5th Cir.· 1951-07-19 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the defendants' good faith use of the trademark 'Creamette' for frozen desserts did not constitute unfair competition, as the products were dissimilar and no actual confusion or wrongful intent was shown.
• Foxco Indus., Ltd. v. Fabric World, Inc.
  595 F.2d 976· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-22 ·cited 14×
  A foreign corporation's limited solicitation of orders and periodic sales visits to Alabama, without maintaining an office or employees there, constitutes interstate commerce and does not subject it to Alabama's "doing business" statutes, allowing it to sue in federal court. Addi
• SAR Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Dumas Bros. MFG. Co., Inc.
  526 F.2d 1283· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-12 ·cited 14×
  A foreign corporation's failure to comply with Alabama's business qualification statutes precludes it from enforcing contracts made and performed within the state, even if the transactions have interstate aspects.
• Dunlop v. Indus. Am. Corp.
  516 F.2d 498· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that prior to the 1974 amendment, the Fair Labor Standards Act did not cover local service enterprises whose only connection to interstate commerce was as consumers of goods that had moved in interstate commerce.
• Safeway Stores v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  366 F.2d 795· 9th Cir.· 1966-09-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the FTC had jurisdiction based on interstate sales and that the evidence supported findings of a price-fixing conspiracy. The court also rejected claims of disqualification and improper use of official notice.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. W. Meat Packers, Inc.
  350 F.2d 804· 10th Cir.· 1965-09-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board cannot compel recognition of a bargaining agent selected through state-conducted elections if those elections violate the National Labor Relations Act's election spacing requirements or are not by consent.
• Shreveport MacAroni Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  321 F.2d 404· 5th Cir.· 1963-07-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that payments made by a seller engaged in interstate commerce to customers for advertising services, even if the competition between customers is intrastate, violate Section 2(d) of the Clayton Act if not made available on proportionally equal terms to all competin
• Lloyd v. United Liquors Corp.
  203 F.2d 789· 6th Cir.· 1953-04-16 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction and in denying the plaintiff leave to amend his complaint, as the alleged conspiracy to fix liquor prices could substantially affect interstate commerce.
• Swift & Co. v. Wilkerson
  124 F.2d 176· 5th Cir.· 1941-12-10 ·cited 14×
  An employee engaged solely in intrastate sales and deliveries is not covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act's overtime provisions, even if the employer is engaged in interstate commerce.
• State OF N.D. & Pub. Serv. Comm'n of N.D. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  247 F.2d 173· 8th Cir.· 1957-08-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Federal Power Commission correctly refused to assert jurisdiction over intrastate 'firm gas' contracts, even when commingled with interstate gas, because the gas was produced, transported, sold, and consumed entirely within the state.
• Hanf v. United States
  235 F.2d 710· 8th Cir.· 1956-07-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged offenses, the motions to dismiss were untimely, and the Federal Alcohol Administration Act constitutionally applies to intrastate liquor sales that affect interstate commerce or revenue.
• Lawson v. Woodmere, Inc.
  217 F.2d 148· 4th Cir.· 1954-11-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendants' local cemetery and vault installation practices did not constitute a restraint of interstate commerce under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
• Rosenberg v. Semeria
  137 F.2d 742· 9th Cir.· 1943-08-17 ·cited 12×
  Janitorial employees of banks are not engaged in commerce for FLSA purposes, even if the banks are.
• Lonas v. Nat'l Linen Serv. Corp.
  136 F.2d 433· 6th Cir.· 1943-06-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the employer, a linen supply company, is a service establishment exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act's minimum wage and overtime provisions because the greater part of its servicing is in intrastate commerce.
• Aquionics Acceptance Corp. v. Kollar
  503 F.2d 1225· 6th Cir.· 1974-10-09 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the jury instruction on interstate commerce was erroneous and that the use of intrastate telephone calls and the mails in connection with a securities transaction can satisfy the "use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce" requirement of Secti
• Walker Operating Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  874 F.2d 1320· 10th Cir.· 1989-04-28 ·cited 10×
  FERC had jurisdiction to determine the scope of natural gas dedicated to interstate commerce and to interpret state law for the purpose of applying federal statutes, and its findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence.
• Mandina v. United States
  472 F.2d 1110· 8th Cir.· 1973-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(1) does not require proof of interstate commerce for unlawful dealing in firearms, and that Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate intrastate firearm dealing that substantially affects interstate commerce.
• Unif. OIL Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
  400 F.2d 267· 9th Cir.· 1968-09-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to provide adequate proof that the alleged price-fixing activity was in interstate commerce or had a substantial effect upon it, thus the District Court lacked jurisdiction.
• Cal. Interstate Tel. Co. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  328 F.2d 556· D.C. Cir.· 1964-02-06 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the FCC's decision, holding that it had jurisdiction and did not err in granting Western Union's applications based on superior reliability and lower cost, despite California Interstate's objections.
• Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  129 F.2d 183· 3d Cir.· 1942-05-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the Federal Power Commission's determination that Jersey Central is a public utility, and that Jersey Central's transmission of electricity to Public Service, some of which reached Staten Island, constituted interstate commerce su
• Fornel v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co.
  65 Fla. 102· Fla.· 1913-02-04 ·cited 10×
  Fornel sued the Florida East Coast Railway Company for damages caused by unreasonable delay in transporting six carloads of tomatoes from Lemon City to Chicago. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the declaration and struck portions seeking interest and attorney's fees under
• In re the Application of Silenus Wines, Inc.
  557 F.2d 806· C.C.P.A.· 1977-06-23 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the importation and subsequent intrastate sale of wine bearing a trademark constitutes 'use in commerce' under the Lanham Act, even if the sale occurs within a single state, because it directly affects foreign commerce.
• Navarro v. Broney Auto. Repairs, Inc.
  533 F. Supp. 2d 1223· S.D. Fla.· 2008-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff, a garage worker installing auto parts, was not covered by the FLSA because his activities did not constitute engagement in interstate commerce.
• Wycoff Co., Inc. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n of Utah
  195 F.2d 252· 10th Cir.· 1951-12-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the transportation of motion picture films from a distributor's exchange to exhibitors within the state constituted interstate commerce, subject to federal jurisdiction.
• Landreth v. Wabash R. Co.
  153 F.2d 98· 7th Cir.· 1946-01-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the prior decision by the Illinois Industrial Commission, which became a final and binding decision after the Superior Court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal, acted as res judicata, barring the current FELA action.
• Walling v. Silver Bros. Co., Inc.
  136 F.2d 168· 1st Cir.· 1943-05-21 ·cited 8×
  Employees engaged in intrastate commerce or those exempt under the Motor Carrier Act are not covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act, even if their employer engages in interstate commerce.
• Gen. Sec. Ins. Co. v. Barrentine
  829 So. 2d 980· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-11-07 ·cited 7×
  General Security Insurance Company appealed a declaratory judgment holding it liable to provide coverage for a truck and driver involved in a fatal collision. The court reversed, finding the truck and driver were not covered under the policy because they had not been reported to
• Gov't Suppliers Consolidating Servs. v. Honorable Evan Bayh
  975 F.2d 1267· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the backhaul ban, registration, and stickering provisions were subject to Pike balancing, but the surety bond provision was an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce. The court reversed in part and affirmed in part.
• S. Union Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  857 F.2d 812· D.C. Cir.· 1988-09-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) erroneously determined that a state court judgment for negligent misrepresentation was not controlled by the Arkla decision, and that the damages awarded effectively constituted an impermissible retroactive rate
• State OF Tex. v. United States
  837 F.2d 184· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it lacked authority to enjoin state court proceedings because the state action did not threaten the federal court's jurisdiction over the administrative appeal.
• Diversacon Indus., Inc. v. Nat'l Bank OF Commerce OF Miss.
  629 F.2d 1030· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Diversacon's activities were part of a unitary interstate transaction, and thus Mississippi's door-closing statute, which required qualification to do business, could not bar its suit, as enforcing it would impermissibly burden interstate commerce.
• Yellow CAB Co. OF Nev. v. CAB Employers
  457 F.2d 1032· 9th Cir.· 1972-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the alleged conspiracy did not substantially affect interstate commerce, nor was the plaintiff directly engaged in interstate commerce in a way that invoked the Sherman Act.
• Bott v. Am. Hydrocarbon Corp.
  441 F.2d 896· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the California statute of limitations was tolled by the defendant corporation's absence from California, entitling the plaintiff to judgment on the jury's verdict.
• Island Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  331 F.2d 207· 9th Cir.· 1964-04-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court must expressly rule on the territorial boundaries of Hawaii, including the intervening sea space, before entering a final decree.
• Goldberg v. Furman Beauty Supply, Inc.
  300 F.2d 16· 3d Cir.· 1962-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Furman Beauty Supply failed to meet the statutory requirements for exemption under Section 13(a)(2) of the Fair Labor Standards Act.