Idaho Power & Light Co. v. Blomquist
Idaho Supreme Court
Original proceeding in this court for a writ of review to determine the validity of the order of the public utilities commission, requiring the plaintiffs to refrain from constructing their proposed plants in either the city of Twin Falls or Pocatello, on the ground that such companies have not obtained a certificate of public convenience and necessity requiring such service.
Read the full summary
Original proceeding in this court for a writ of review to determine the validity of the order of the public utilities commission, requiring the plaintiffs to refrain from constructing their proposed plants in either the city of Twin Falls or Pocatello, on the ground that such companies have not obtained a certificate of public convenience and necessity requiring such service. The provision requiring a written acceptance of a city franchise is merely one of the conditions subsequent which may be waived and the acceptance may be evidenced by acts. (4 McQuillin on Mun. Corp., sec. 1650; Postal…
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
On this hearing two separate and distinct applications for writs of review under sec. 63a of the act known as the public utilities act (Laws 1913, p. 247), are involved. One case is entitled the Idaho Power & Light Co., a Corporation, v. J. A. Blomquist, A. P. Ramstedt and D. W. Standrod, as the Public Utilities. Commission of the State of Idaho (which is known as the Twin Falls case); and the other is entitled, The Beaver River Power Co., a Corporation, v. J. A. Blomquist, A. P. Ramstedt and D. W. Standrod, as the Public Utilities Commission of the State of Idaho (known as the Pocatello…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Munn v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Field v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Union Bridge Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. North Carolina Corporation Comm'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Diefendorf v. GalletIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
- Woodburn v. Public Service CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1916
- Mead v. ArnellIdaho Supreme Court · 1990
- Ennis v. State Highway CommissionIndiana Supreme Court · 1952
- Corporation Commission v. Peoples Freight Line, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1932
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.