Hi Tech Trans, LLC v. New Jersey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he most cursory analysis of Hi Tech’s operations reveals that its facility does not involve “transportation by rail carrier.” The most it involves is transportation “to rail carrier.” Trucks bring [construction and demolition] debris from construction sites to Hi Tech’s facility where the debris is dumped into Hi Tech’s hoppers. Hi Tech then “trans-loads,” the [construction and demolition] debris from its hoppers into rail cars owned and operated by ... the railroad. It is [the railroad] that then transports the [construction and demolition] debris “by rail” to out of state disposal facilities.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. New York & Atlantic Railway Co. v. Surface Transportation Board · 450 F. Supp. 2d 467 - Hackensack Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Delaware Ostego Corp.

2. “(b) The jurisdiction of the Board over— (1) transportation by rail carriers, and the remedies provided in this part with respect to rates, classifications, rules (including car service, interchange, and other operating rules), practices, routes, services, and facilities of such carriers; and (2) the construction, acquisition, operation, abandonment, or discontinuance of spur, industrial, team, switching, or side tracks, or facilities, even if the tracks are located, or intended to be located, entirely in one State, is exclusive. Except as otherwise provided in this part, the remedies provided under this part with respect to the regulation of rail transportation are exclusive and preempt the remedies provided under Federal or State law. ICCTA defines “transportation” as including: (A) a locomotive, car, vehicle, vessel, warehouse, wharf, pier, dock, yard, property, facility, instrumentality, or equipment of any kind related to the movement of passengers or property, or both, by rail, regardless of owner ship or an agreement concerning use; and (B) services related to that movement, including receipt, delivery, elevation, transfer in transit, refrigeration, icing, ventilation, storage, handling, and interchange of passengers and property.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 450 F. Supp. 2d 467 - Hackensack Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Delaware Ostego Corp.

3. “does not involve “transportation by rail carrier.” The most it involves is transportation “to rail carrier.” * * * The mere fact that the [Canadian Pacific Railroad] ultimately uses rail cars to transport the [construction and demolition] debris Hi Tech loads does not morph Hi Tech’s activities into “transportation by rail carrier.” Indeed, if Hi Tech’s reasoning is accepted, any nonrail carrier’s operations would come under the exclusive jurisdiction of the STB if, at some point in a chain of distribution, it handles products that are eventually shipped by rail by a railcarrier [sic]. The district court could not accept the argument that Congress intended the exclusive jurisdiction of the STB to sweep that broadly, and neither can we.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Girard v. Youngstown Belt Railway Co.