Court Opinion

ID: 9700662
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 21:40:43.477324+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:13.041853
License: Public Domain

The following opinion was filed March 7, 1961:
Per Curiam (on motion for rehearing). The commission asserts that our mandate directs the circuit court to exercise legislative power in remanding the proceeding to the commission. We said (p. 282) :
“The majority of the court are of the opinion that as to all issues under sec. 105.13, including the issue of need in the community, the commission is bound by the present *253arecord, without reopening the hearing for additional evidence. Accordingly, if a proper bond is again filed, the minimum fee paid, and if the commission determines that the applicant’s proposed fees and rules are reasonable, the license must be issued.”
The commission argues that we have tacitly overruled prior decisions, particularly Clintonville Transfer Line v. Public Service Comm. (1945), 248 Wis. 59, 21 N. W. (2d) 5. We have not done so.
The framework of sec. 105.13, Stats., the statute involved in this case, is significant. Application was made August 15, 1958, and the hearing held the following October. The statute compelled issuance of the license unless one or more of three findings were made. The commission declined to make either the first or second finding adverse to applicant. We have decided that its adverse finding on the third subject was not supported by evidence. In the absence of a statutory ground for refusal (and assuming bond requirements and the like were fulfilled), the statute itself required the commission to issue a license.
The motion for rehearing is denied.