Legal Opinion

Michigan Bell Telephone Co. v. Odell

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided November 25, 1930No. 1322PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

The plaintiff is a Michigan corporation owning and operating a public utility in the state; the defendants are tho members of the Michigan Public Utilities Commission and the Attorney General. The interveners are the cities of Detroit and Grand Rapids and a number of other cities of the state, which, in the absence of objections, were permitted to intervene. The bill is filed to declaro null and void certain specified orders of the defendant commission prescribing maximum telephone rates to be charged by the plaintiff in its various exchanges in the state, such rates being alleged to result…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Service Commission of MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. Central Vermont Railway Co. v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  3. Smith v. Illinois Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
  4. McCardle v. Indianapolis Water Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. United Rs. & Elec. Co. of Baltimore v. WestSupreme Court of the United States · 1930

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Alabama Public Service Commission v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1949
  2. Denver Union Stock Yard Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1932
  3. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R. Co. v. Adams CountyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1934
  4. International Ry. Co. v. PrendergastDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1932
  5. Denver Union Stock Yard Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1932

2 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