Case ID: ohio-law-abs_5/html/0012-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MABSHALL, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 15
    No. 19873
    No. 19866
    No. 19868
    No. 19875
    No. 19876
    No. 20007
    No. 20008
    No. 19867
    No. 19872
    No. 19877
    The New York Central Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. Erie Railroad Co., and Chicago & Erie Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. The Hocking Valley Railway Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. The Pennsylvania Railroad., v. Public Utilities Commission. The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. The Pennsylvania Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. The Pennsylvania Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. The Hocking Valley Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. The New York Central Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission. The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., v. Public Utilities Commission.
    Error to the Public Utilities Commission.
    973. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION— Statutes relating to public motor transportation and conferring jurisdiction upon Commission to regulate same have equal application to both motor and freight transportation.
   MABSHALL, C. J.

1. All statutes relating to- public motor transportation service upon the highways of the state and conferring jurisdiction upon the puiblic utilities commission to -regulate the same have equal application to both passenger and freight transportation.

2. An irregular route described in section 614-84 General Code, may not be granted in such general terms as to embrace all the streets and highways of the state, unless the public utilities commission shall find upon evidence adduced that there is a need for such transportation in all parts of the state and unless the commission shall further find upon evidence adduced -that the applicant has facilities to adequately supply such need, and an order granting the same shall be so limited and safeguarded as not to- unreasonably conflict with regular and irregular routes for freight motor transportation theretofore established. Lake Shore Elec. Ry. v. P. U. C., No. 19509, approved and followed.

Orders reversed in causes Nos. 19873, 19866, 19868, 19875, 19876, 20007 and 20008.

Orders affirmed in .causes Nos. 19867, 19872 and 19877.

Jones, Matthias, Day, Allen, Kinkade and Bobinson, JJ., concur.