Colorado Telephone Co. v. Fields
New Mexico Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court for Bernalillo County before Ira A. Abbott, Associate Justice. The power to limit the charges of public service corporations, in order to be exercised by municipal authorities, must be expressly delegated to them by the legislature, and is not included in power to regulate the use of streets. 27 A. & E. Ene. 1020; St. Louis v. Bell T. Co., 96 Mo. 623, 2 L. B. A. 278; Macklin v. Home Tel.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court for Bernalillo County before Ira A. Abbott, Associate Justice. The power to limit the charges of public service corporations, in order to be exercised by municipal authorities, must be expressly delegated to them by the legislature, and is not included in power to regulate the use of streets. 27 A. & E. Ene. 1020; St. Louis v. Bell T. Co., 96 Mo. 623, 2 L. B. A. 278; Macklin v. Home Tel. Co., 24 Ohio C. C. 446; State ex rel v. Sheboygan, Wis., 86 N. W. 657; C. L. 1897, sec. 2402, sub-secs. 3, 11; Oregon Ry. & N. Co. v. Oregon Ry. Co., 130 H. S. 1; Perrine v. C.…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE OOURT.
PAEKEE, J.
From the foregoing statement it appears that there is a single question involved in this appeal. viz., What is a proper construction of tire charter and contract of appellant?
Appellee contends in support of the judgment of the court below that in construing a grant of power to corporations of the class of appellant, it is to be strictly construed against the grantee and that nothing passes but what is combed in clear and explicit terms and cites in support of his proposition Oregon Ry. and Nav. Co. v. Oregonian Ry. Co., 130 U. S. 1; Central Transportation Co. v.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Central Transportation Co. v. Pullman's Palace Car Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Oregon Railway & Navigation Co. v. Oregonian Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Omaha Water Co. v. City of OmahaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. v. ManningSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Haney v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1879
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hoge v. Farmers Market & Supply Co. of Las Cruces, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1956
- Brown v. Village of DemingNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1952
- City of Richmond v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1920
- Garrison v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1964
- Rubenstein v. WeilNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1965
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.