A. & T. Motor Freight, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission

The plaintiff in error’s main contention is that there is no evidence showing reasonable adequacy of service of the nature applied for presented in this record. Since this court will not substitute its own judgment for that of the Public Utilities Commission upon the facts contained in the record, unless an order based thereon is against the manifest weight of the evidence (Lykins v. Public Utilities Commission, 115 Ohio St., 376, 154 N. E., 249), we proceed to consider whether the order of the commission is unreasonable or unlawful in that regard.

"With reference to the application for the…