Legal Opinion
Columbus Ry., Power & Light Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 15, 1927No. 19878PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
It has been repeatedly held by this court that, when existing common carriers are rendering service which is adequate to take care of the needs of the traveling public between certain points, the Public Utilities Commission is not justified in granting a new certificate or in increasing the service of some one transportation company along the same route. Cincinnati Traction Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, 112 Ohio St., 699, 148 N. E., 921; McLain v. Public Utilities Commission, 110 Ohio St., 1, 143 N. E., 381; Coney Island Motor Bus Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, 115…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- McLain v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1924
- Scioto Valley Ry. & Power Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1926
- Cincinnati Traction Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1925
- Trac. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1926
- Coney Island Motor Bus Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1926
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ferguson-Steere Motor Co. v. State Corp. CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1957
- Lorain-Amherst Transit, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1947
- Clark v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1930
- Edwards Motor Transit Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad v. Town of MorristownSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.