Legal Opinion

Michigan Public Utilities Commission v. Krol

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 7, 1929No. Docket No. 151, Calendar No. 33,790PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSharpe, J.

In 1925, and again in 1926, the defendant applied to the plaintiff commission for a permit to “operate common carrier motor vehicle freight service between .Sault Ste. Marie and Detour,” in the county of Chippewa, in accordance with the provisions of Act No. 209, Pub. Acts 1923. Both applications were denied. The commission granted a permit therefor to the Chippewa Motor Transport Company. In its bill of complaint plaintiff alleges that defendant is, and has been for several years, engaged in the business for which such permits were sought without obtaining the same, in violation of the penal…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Michigan Public Utilities Commission v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. Jackson Architectural Iron Works v. HurlbutNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  4. Rutledge Co-Operative Ass'n v. BaughmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1927
  5. Rapid Railway Co. v. Michigan Public Utilities CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1923

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Weaver v. Public Service CommissionWyoming Supreme Court · 1929
  2. State Ex Rel. Board of Railroad Commissioners v. RosensteinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1934
  3. Greyhound Corp. v. Public Service CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
  4. North Shore Fish & Freight Co. v. North Shore Business Men's Trucking Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  5. G & a Truck Line, Inc. v. Public Service CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1953

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API