Capitol Taxicab Co. v. Cermak
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
LINDLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff is a corporation seeking to be allowed to transact the business of transporting passengers for hire in taxicabs in the city of Chicago. It prays in its bill of complaint an injunction against tho municipal authorities from enforcing a certain ordinance gov-earning the licensing of such public vehicles,
The ordinance creates a public vehicle 1L «enso commission and provides that no taxicab license shall issue unless the commission shall, after hearing, declare that “public con-venienee and necessity require Ihe proposed service.” However, it is further provided…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Packard v. BantonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Gorieb v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Sligh v. KirkwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Decatur v. ChasteenIllinois Supreme Court · 1960
- Yellow Cab Co. v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1947
- Fletcher v. BordelonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
- Dallas Taxicab Co. v. City of DallasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1934
- Airport Taxi Cab Advisory Committee v. City of AtlantaDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.