Adams v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.
The appellants challenge the action of the Public Utilities Commission upon the ground that the applicant has not legal capacity to hold a certificate of public convenience and necessity and that the record failed to disclose that the existing service is inadequate, and therefore the finding and order of the commission is unreasonable and unlawful.
The George K. Scott & Company, Inc., owns and operates a storage warehouse in the city of Cleveland. In connection, therewith it operates several moving vans within the limits of the city of Cleveland and municipalities immediately contiguous…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McLain v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1924
- Pennsylvania Rd. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1927
- H. & K. Motor Transportation, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1939
- Bray v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1942
3Cited by2 opinions
- Modern Motor Express, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1950
- Wrightesmith v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1963