keep the revenue derived from ticket sales even if a Blue Lines bus is used; to compensate Blue Lines a Holiday Travel Club bus is made available to them when it is needed. This apparently causes little conflict for the bus drivers, who are hired on a daily basis (Davis refers to them as "independent contractors"). Often, the same driver will be employed by both Blue Lines and HT.
The evidence further establishes that HT operates outside the framework of Blue Lines' certificate of convenience and necessity. That certificate does not permit Blue Lines to originate sightseeing tours in Fairfax County. Oral evidence and uncontested affidavits presented by WMATC reveal, however, that HT has been originating sightseeing tours, conducted in coaches, from Fairfax County. While the evidence does disclose a working relationship between Blue Lines and Holiday Tours, the vast majority of that evidence indicates that HT is only an agent for sales and organization purposes. HT does not derive authority to conduct sightseeing tours from its relationship with Blue Lines.
Assuming arguendo that the Blue Line/HT relationship did provide that HT was delegated the authority to conduct sightseeing tours, this delegation would be unlawful. The Act, 1 D.C.Code § 1410, et seq., provides for an extensive regulatory scheme to protect both the public and the carriers. A certificate of necessity and convenience is issued to facilitate the regulatory aspects of the Act. Permitting certificated carriers to delegate authority to uncertificated carriers would subvert WMATC's ability to regulate the industry pursuant to the Act, and is therefore unlawful.
The Court finds that Defendants have willfully and systematically violated this Court's injunction and Order of July 5, 1978. The Court can and does use its contempt power to prevent further violations. See Shillitanti v. U. S., 384 U.S. 364, 86 S. Ct. 1531, 16 L. Ed. 2d 622 (1966).
An appropriate Order follows this Memorandum.
Upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Contempt, Defendants' Opposition thereto, the Memorandum accompanying this Order, and the entire record herein, it is by the Court this 28th day of March, 1980,
ADJUDGED, that the Defendants HT, HTC, and HGS are in willful contempt of the Order of this Court of May 17, 1977, as amended by Order of July 5, 1978, and it is therefore,
ORDERED, that Walter Lee Davis, as President and sole shareholder of Holiday Tours, Inc., is sentenced to thirty (30) days imprisonment for failure to pay the costs of the 1976 shuttle service proceedings; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that Mr. Davis may purge himself of the above stated jail sentence by making payment of the costs of Four Hundred Seventy-Six Dollars ($ 476) with interest, from March 15, 1977, within ten (10) days, to Plaintiff Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that Defendant Holiday Tours, Inc. is fined One Thousand Dollars ($ 1,000) to be paid to the Court within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this Order; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that Walter Lee Davis, as President and sole shareholder of Holiday Tours, Inc. and Holiday Gift Shops, Inc., and President of Holiday Travel Club, is sentenced to one (1) year imprisonment for the willful and flagrant contempt of this Court; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that Defendant Holiday Tours, Inc., is fined Ten Thousand Dollars ($ 10,000) payable within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that Defendant Holiday Tours, Inc., and its President Walter Lee Davis, may purge themselves of the one (1) year prison sentence and the Ten Thousand Dollar ($ 10,000) fine imposed above, provided that
(1) All Defendants, Walter Lee Davis, and any corporation, partnership, or business venture that any of the Defendants, principals thereof, or Mr. Davis are or subsequently become involved in, shall divest themselves of all right, title and interest in any coaches, buses, or other vehicles with capacity for eight (8) or more passengers within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order, this divestiture to be made to a bona fide purchaser for value, and not to any Defendant, principal thereof, or Walter Lee Davis, or to any corporation, partnership, or business venture established by any of the Defendants, principals thereto, or Walter Lee Davis, for the conduct of a tour or sightseeing business; and
(2) As an alternative to the form of divestiture set forth above, Defendants shall surrender the coaches to the Federal Marshal Service for sale at a public auction, provided that none of the above mentioned persons or entities participates in any fashion in the purchase of said coaches; and
(3) None of the Defendants, principals thereto or Walter Lee Davis, or any corporation, partnership or business venture created by or participated in by any of the Defendants, principals thereof, or Mr. Davis shall buy or rent an ownership or leasehold interest in any vehicle with a capacity of more than eight (8) passengers for the purpose of conducting a tour or sightseeing business, except that the above stated persons may occasionally charter certificated coaches for tours and sightseeing consistent with this Court's July 5, 1978 Order.