Case Name: The Cannon Ball Transportation Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1925
Citations: 3 Ohio Law Abs. 755
Docket Number: No. 19327
Parties: The Cannon Ball Transportation Co. v. Public Utilities Commission.
Judges: Jones, Matthias, Day, Allen, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 3
Pages: 755–755

Head Matter:
No. 988
No. 19327
The Cannon Ball Transportation Co. v. Public Utilities Commission.
970. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
1.Not authorized by 614-83 to 614-102 GC. to exclude motor transportation companies operating in interstate traffic from state highways; but such companies are subject to provisions of said sections except where provisions would involve a direct burden upon interstate commerce.
2.Condition that passengers may not be received within state of Ohio whose destination are within state is not such a burden upon interstate commerce.

Opinion:
MARSHALL, C. J.
1. Section 614-86 to. 614-102 inclusive, of the General Code of Ohio, are designed to regulate motor transportation governing all motor vehicles operating over the highways of the state, but do riot authorize the publib utilities commission to. .exclude motor -transportation companies' operating in interstate traffic from such highways.
2. Motor transportation companies operating in interstate traffic are subject to the provisions of said seetions and the regulations therein provided may be applied to all interstate operators éxcept in so far as such application would involve a direct burden Upon, interstate commerce. ' . ' .
3. A condition in a certificate of convenience and necessity granted to .an interstate operation that passenger's may not be received within the. state of Ohio whose destinations are also within the state, of Ohio, is not an'.un-' reasonable. condition and odes not operate as a direct burden upon .interstate coriimeree.
Order, affirmed.
Jones, Matthias, Day, Allen, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.