Legal Opinion
Gilmer v. Public Utilities Commission
Utah Supreme Court
Decided June 4, 1926No. 4351PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFrick, J.
The plaintiff applied for and obtained the usual writ of review for the purpose of reviewing an order of the Public Utilities Commission of the state of Utah, hereinafter, for convenience, called the commission.
To afford the reader a better understanding of what is before this court for review, we deem it necessary to make a brief statement of the proceedings leading up to the particular order that is presented for review.
The record shows that in the year 1918, after the Public Utilities Act went into effect (Comp. Laws 1917, § 4775 et seq.), one Joseph Carling, pursuant to the provisions of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Salt Lake City v. Utah Light & Traction Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1918
- Modeste v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
- Motor Transit Co. v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- State v. DarazzoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
- Westhoven v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1925
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- In Re Theel Brpthers Rapid Transit Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1942
- Cottonwood Mall Shopping Center, Inc. v. Utah Power & Light Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1971
- Tri-City Motor Transportation Co. v. Great Northern Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1936
- Milne Truck Lines, Inc. v. Public Service CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1962
- Russell v. CalhounWyoming Supreme Court · 1937
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.