Legal Opinion

Sohngen v. Pub. Util. Comm.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1926No. Nos. 19835 and 19836PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

George P. Sohngen, as receiver of the Cincinnati Dayton Traction Company, on April 29, 1925, filed with the state Public Utilities Commission an application for a certificate to operate a motor transportation line between Franklin and Cincinnati, by way of Sharonville. At that time, and for some time prior thereto, King Bros. were operating a motor transportation line between Lebanon and Cincinnati, by way of Sharonville, and on May 25, 1925, they filed an application for an order extending such certificate, so as to authorize them to operate between Sharonville and Franklin. There was before…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McLain v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Royal Green Coach Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Furstenberg v. Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Public Service Commission v. ByronCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1927
  3. Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. BennettMontana Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Akron Transportation Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API