Court Opinion

ID: 9646343
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 12:57:33.18811+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:37.490497
License: Public Domain

On Appellants’ Motion for Rehearing.
In their motion for rehearing appellants say that we have “completely ignored” our own opinion in Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Railroad Commission, Tex.Civ.App., 138 S.W.2d 927, which, they say, “declares a certificate issued by the Commission without regulation as to rates is void.”
It is true that we did not cite this case, the reasons for which are twofold. In the first place this case went to the Supreme Court, 138 Tex. 148, 157 S.W.2d 622, 626, and that court ordered that the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals “be reversed, set aside, and held for naught.” Furthermore, the Supreme Court there said that, as they understood it, the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals held “that this permit was illegal in its inception because the Commission failed and refused to hear evidence on, or to consider, the question of public convenience ' .and necessity for its issuance.”
These facts are, in our opinion, sufficient justification for our failure to .cite such case as authority for or against the point urged by appellants.
We have, however, re-examined the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals in such case and we find the court saying that a law requiring regulation of rates of certain .carriers which did not require regulation of rates of other carriers performing the same services would be discriminatory and invalid and a permit issued under such a law would likewise be invalid. No siich question is presented in this case.
The record here shows that no rates have been prescribed by the Commission for transportation of any of -the com-*146modifies described in the involved permits. Hence it is impossible that there be any discrimination in theory or in fact in favor of or against any carrier transporting such commodities.
The establishment of fair rates for the transportation of new commodities is a complex matter and one requiring careful study by the Commission. Experience is an important factor in rate-determination, and we do not believe the law requires the Commission to act precipitatedly in such matters.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.
Overruled.