Court Opinion

ID: 9642340
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 17:55:25.483527+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:46.190428
License: Public Domain

ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING.
WOODLEY, Judge.
Appellant asserts “that the State Law forbids the requiring of this ‘taxicab driver’s license’ as a prerequisite to the right of Ed Heine to operate his taxicab; that the ordinance of the City of Houston conflicts with the state law and is invalid.”
The particular state law to which appellant refers is that part of Art. 6687b, Sec. 1, providing for the issuance of chauffeur’s license, and especially to the provision found in Art. 6687b, Article II, Sec. 2(c), which reads as follows:
“No person holding an operator’s, commercial operator’s, or chauffeur’s license duly issued under the provisions of this Act shall be required to obtain any license for the operation of a motor vehicle from any other State authority or department. Subsection (c) of Section 4 of Article 911A and Subsection (b) of Section 4 of Article 911B, Revised Civil Statutes, is hereby repealed.”
The quoted section specifically repealed laws concerning the issuance of license to drivers of certain vehicles by the Railroad Commission of Texas. We think that it was the intention of the legislature only to provide that no license could thereafter be required of a driver by that or any other similar authority or department, and that the language used was not intended to apply .to home rule cities or cities specifically authorized under their charter to license and regulate the use of motor vehicles for hire in such cities.
We remain convinced that the ordinance in question is not invalid as in conflict with the above statute, and that the state has not preempted the field so as to preclude the city of Houston from requiring persons who desire to drive a taxicab on the streets of that city to procure a license in the manner provided in the ordinance. At least in the particular pointed out in our original opinion the requirement for the issuance of a taxicab driver’s license is valid.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.