Legal Opinion

Furstenberg v. Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Co.

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1937No. 29841PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Chappell, District Judge.

Appellants Roy J. Furstenberg, as applicant, and the city of Omaha, proponent, by precedent approval, applied to the Nebraska state railway commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity thereby seeking authority for appellant Furstenberg to engage in the common carrier business of transporting passengers for hire by motor busses in Omaha over one definite route upon a definite schedule at a certain price. The application was denied. Motion for new trial was overruled, and both applicant and proponent, hereinafter called appellants, come to this…

2Cases cited74 opinions

  1. New State Ice Co. v. LiebmannSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  3. Procter & Gamble Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  4. Shupee v. Railroad CommissionTexas Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Chicago Railways Co. v. Commerce Commission Ex Rel. Chicago Motor Coach Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1929

69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. State ex rel. State Railway Commission v. RamseyNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Application of Dakota Transp. Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1940
  3. State ex rel. Johnson v. Consumers Public Power DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Municipalities of HoldregeNebraska Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Moritz v. Transcontinental Bus Lines, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1950

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API