Case ID: ohio-st-2d_14/html/0024-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bruder, d. b. a. Bruder Cartage Co., Appellant, v. Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, Appellee.
    (No. 41138
    Decided March 27, 1968.)
    
      Mr. Bernard 8. Goldfarb, for appellant.
    
      Mr. William B. Saxbe, attorney general, and Mr. J. Philip Redick, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

Appellant’s contention, that Rule 1.04 (d) of the Rules and Regulations of the Public Utilities Commission is invalid on the ground that it violates Section 16 of Article I of the Ohio Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is without merit.

Upon consideration of the record, this court holds that the order of the commission denying applicant’s application is neither unreasonable nor unlawful. Section 4903.13, Revised Code; H. & K. Motor Transportation, Inc., v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1939), 135 Ohio St. 145, 19 N. E. 2d 956; Jones v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1943), 141 Ohio St. 237, 47 N. E. 2d 780.

Therefore, the order of the Public Utilities Commission is affirmed.

Order affirmed.

Taft, C. J., ZxmmebmaN, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, SchNeider and BrowN, JJ., concur.