Legal Opinion

Motor Transport & Truck Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1932No. 23434PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.

It is contended by counsel for plaintiff in error, (1) That the Public Utilities Commission is without authority to deny its application to operate a motortruck service in interstate commerce, on the route applied for upon the ground that the highway over which it seeks to operate is so badly congested that the maintenance of the proposed motortruck serv ice by the applicant would create an excessive and undue hazard to the safety and security of the traveling public and to the property upon such highway; and (2) that if the Public Utilities Commission does have such power the record in this…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hendrick v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  2. Smith v. CahoonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Buck v. KuykendallSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  4. Packard v. BantonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  5. Morris v. DubySupreme Court of the United States · 1927

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bradley v. Public Util. Comm'n of OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  2. Holly v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Stickel v. Erie Motor Freight, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Council Bluffs Transit Co. v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Bradley v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1932

1 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