Legal Opinion

Rinker v. New Mexico State Corp. Commission

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1973No. 9464PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STEPHENSON, Justice.

Intervenors (“grantees”) sought the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the defendantsappellees (“the Commission”). Appellants (“protestants”) being certificated for hire common carriers providing service conflicting in whole or in part with the authority sought by the grantees both as to commodities and territories served, protested. The Commission granted to the grantees a certificate to operate a for hire motor common carrier service transporting:

“Monies, securities, checks, business records, jewelry, mail, and other valuable…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Tapia v. Panhandle Steel Erectors CompanyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Cave v. CaveNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Transcontinental Bus System, Inc. v. State Corp. CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Ferguson-Steere Motor Co. v. State Corporation Com'nNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Marjon v. QuintanaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1971

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Duke City Lumber Co. v. New Mexico Environmental Improvement BoardNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Wolfley v. Real Estate CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Groendyke Transport, Inc. v. New Mexico State Corp. CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Grace v. Oil Conservation Commission of New MexicoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1975
  5. State v. TorresNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2018

27 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