People v. Tedesco
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
BISHOP, J., pro tem.
We are invited, in these two cases, to enter upon an interesting field of study for the purpose of surveying the line which marks the boundary between the right of the state to fix minimum rates for the trucking business and the right of the federal government to have its work done at a price to be determined by unrestricted competitive bidding. Because the complaints upon which our approach to the problem depends are insufficient, our investigation stops with our approval of the orders sustaining demurrers without leave to amend.
The authority upon which the plaintiff…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Hertz Drivurself Stations, Inc. v. SigginsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Entremont v. WhitsellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- State ex rel. Schroath v. CondryWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1954
- State v. Southwest Lumber Mills, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1956
- Ryder Truck Rental v. City of PhoenixArizona Tax Court · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.