Case Name: GATOR FREIGHTWAYS, INC., and Crown Motor Lines, Inc., Petitioners, v. Paula F. HAWKINS, Chairman, William T. Mayo, and Robert T. Mann, as and constituting the Florida Public Service Commission, Respondents, and M. R. & R. Trucking Company, Intervening Respondent
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1979-05-03
Citations: 370 So. 2d 1144
Docket Number: No. 55274
Parties: GATOR FREIGHTWAYS, INC., and Crown Motor Lines, Inc., Petitioners, v. Paula F. HAWKINS, Chairman, William T. Mayo, and Robert T. Mann, as and constituting the Florida Public Service Commission, Respondents, and M. R. & R. Trucking Company, Intervening Respondent.
Judges: ADKINS, Acting C. J., and BOYD, OVERTON, HATCHETT and ALDERr MAN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 370
Pages: 1144–1145

Head Matter:
GATOR FREIGHTWAYS, INC., and Crown Motor Lines, Inc., Petitioners, v. Paula F. HAWKINS, Chairman, William T. Mayo, and Robert T. Mann, as and constituting the Florida Public Service Commission, Respondents, and M. R. & R. Trucking Company, Intervening Respondent.
No. 55274.
Supreme Court of Florida.
May 3, 1979.
James E. Wharton, Orlando, for petitioners.
Prentice P. Pruitt, Chief Staff Counsel, and M. Robert Christ, Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, for respondents.
Thomas F. Panebianco of McKenzie & Panebianco, Tallahassee, for M. R. & R. Trucking Co., intervening respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
By petition for writ of certiorari, we are asked to review Order No. 14409 of the Public Service Commission, approving the transfer of certain service routes from one truck line to another. We have jurisdiction to review the commission's order. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const.; § 350.641, Fla.Stat. (1977). Petitioners contend that the commission erred in its findings that the service authority involved was not dormant and that the transfer was not contrary to the public interest. We have examined the record of these proceedings and find that the commission's findings are supported by competent evidence and that the order does not depart from the essential requirements of the law.
Accordingly, the petition is denied.
ADKINS, Acting C. J., and BOYD, OVERTON, HATCHETT and ALDERr MAN, JJ., concur.