THE ATTQEENEYGENERAL 

GERALD C. MANN AUSTIN~~.TEXAS 

Honorable John R. Shook 

Criminal District Attorney 

San Antonio, Texas 

Dear Sir: Opinion No. O-3535 

Re: Authority of donunon carrier 

motor carrier to render 

pick-up and delivery service 

E;m;;;;nts outside of c~ity 

In your letter of June 27, 1941, you submit the following facts: 

"The metropolitan area of the City of San Antonio 

contains a number of unicorporated suburbs, and a 

large number of army posts and camps are located 

within such metropolitan area of the City of San 

Antonio. All of such suburbs and army camps have 

in the past been served by such common carrier truck 

lines without additional certificates of convenience 

and necessity, providing that Stn Antonio was the 

terminus of such freight lines. 

And you request our opinion in response to the following question: 

"Are common carrier truck lines holding certificates of 

convenience and necessity from the Railroad Commission 

of Texas with San Antonio, Texas, as a terminus, authorized to render a pick-up and delivery service within the 

metropolitan area of San Antonio comprising suburbs and 

army camps as above set out without securing additional 

certificates of convenience and,,necessity as provided 

by Section III of Article qllb. 

We gather from your letter as a whole that the suburbs and army 

camps mentioned therein are located short distances outside the 

City of San Antonio and do not lie within the limits of any other 

incorporated cities or towns. We shall so assume and this opinion 

will not be intended to cover any other state of facts. 
. 

- . 

/ * Honorable John R. Shook, Page 2, O-3535 

Since a certificate or permit is not required of one whose 

transportation services would not extend from one incorporated 

city or town to another, (Art. glib, Sec. l(g), V.A.C.S.) it 

will be noted that other persons than the carriers in question 

could perform these pick-up and delivery services without 

obtaining a permit or certificate. Furthermore, since a 

certificate of convenience and necessity authorizing a common 

carrier motor carrier operation cannot be obtained except upon 

an application describing the route of the proposed service 

10 Art. 

!E",,sit~ (Set 

glib) and a showing of public convenience and 

3 and 10, Art. glib) it would be obviously 

impossibli for the common carrier operating into the city, as 

one of its terminal, to obtain a certificate specifically 

authorizing each and all of such multitudinous operations 

involved in delivering and picking up packages transported and 

to be transported over its regular lines. The rendition of 

this type of service has become quite general and we find nothing 

in the motor carrier statute which would seem to forbid it. 

Accordingly, we answer your question in the affirmative, 

advising that the service may be performed so long as it is in 

fact a pick-up and delivery service, wholly incidental to the 

common carrier operation into and out of San Antonio. We can 

well see where such an operation into an army camp, or other 

community center, might grow into an extension of the common 

carrier service, resulting in the establishment of another 

terminal ooint, and coming within our opinion No. O-1592, copy 

of which is enclosed. 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

S/ Glenn R. Lewis 

BY 

Glenn R. Lewis 

Assistant 

APPROVED JULY 22, 1:?41 

s/ Grover Sellers 

FIRST ASSISTANT 

ATTORNXY GXN‘NERAL 

APPROmD @PINION COKKITTRE: 

By BWB, Chairman 

GRL:WE"S/cge