Court Opinion

ID: 9675214
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:45:16.49333+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:32.463936
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
In the motion for rehearing filed by the appellees, complaint is made that the Court of Civil Appeals erred in concluding as a fact that the fares charged by the bus company for its routes in the United States are set by the Interstate Commerce Commission because the Interstate Commerce Commission is totally without jurisdiction to regulate the bus company or control its rates. The Appellants in their brief asserted that new rates were charged passengers as they entered the United States, “which United States laws required by virtue of rates set by the Interstate Commerce Commission. In truth and in fact, the company complied at all times with the rates set by the I.C.C. in the United States —”. Not only did the appellees permit this statement to go unchallenged, but they compounded the error by asserting in their own brief that “the Plaintiff bus company holds a Certificate from the Interstate Commerce Commission”.
A purported copy of the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity granted by the Interstate Commerce Commission is then referred to by Appellees, and it is found in the transcript at the page designated.
*510The statements made by the appellants in their brief not having been challenged, they were and are accepted as correct by this Court. Rule 419 Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion for rehearing is overruled.