Legal Opinion

Stony's Trucking Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 7, 1989No. 87-2003Published

1Per curiam

Stony’s argues that it was unreasonable and unlawful for the commission to deny its application to alter or amend 784-1. We disagree and affirm the order of the commission.

Stony’s application was filed pursuant to R.C. 4921.10, which provides, in part, that “[t]he commission may, for good cause, * * * revoke, alter, or amend any certificate issued under sections 4921.02 to 4921.32 of the Revised Code.”

Appellant admits that the application was brought to “split” a certificate, with the intent of transferring a portion of the authority in a subsequent proceeding. The law is well-settled,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Braddock v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Harold D. Miller, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API