A. C. L. R. R. Co. v. State

143 So. 255, 106 Fla. 278, 1932 Fla. LEXIS 1013
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJuly 26, 1932
StatusPublished

This text of 143 So. 255 (A. C. L. R. R. Co. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
A. C. L. R. R. Co. v. State, 143 So. 255, 106 Fla. 278, 1932 Fla. LEXIS 1013 (Fla. 1932).

Opinions

STATEMENT
In a bill of complaint filed under the statute by the railroad commissioners against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad *Page 280 company, it is in effect alleged that the defendant is a common carrier by railroad operating within the State of Florida; that the defendant owns and operates a line of steam railroad extending in and through the southeastern Gulf States, and in connection with and as a part of its said railroad system owns and operates lines of railroad extending to various stations or points within the State of Florida, including Monticello in the County of Jefferson, State of Florida; that the said defendant has operated since July 1st, 1902, and still operates regular passenger trains transporting passengers within the State of Florida from points to other points therein over its lines of railroad aforesaid; that on December 14, 1925, upon application of the defendant the Interstate Commerce Commission issued a certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing the defendant to construct and operate an extension of its line in Taylor, Madison and Jefferson Counties, Florida; that under and by authority of such certificate the defendant constructed an extension of its line of railroad from Perry, Florida, in a northwestwardly direction to connect with its Thomasville-Georgia-Monticello Branch at a point about five miles north of Monticello and thus established a through line of its railroad serving Perry and Tampa, St. Petersburg and other points on the west coast of Florida. The construction of this connecting line of railroad was completed on or about August 25, 1927. This line of railroad was known as the "Perry Cut-off." No passenger train service was operated over this new line to Perry, Florida, until by order No. 937, dated October 12, 1927 the Railroad Commission of the State of Florida ordered the defendant to operate over its line of railroad from its station called Monticello, Florida, to Perry, Florida, not less than one passenger train each way daily, except Sunday; that in compliance with said Order the defendant on Sunday, November 6, 1927, inaugurated *Page 281 through local service between Albany, Georgia, and Perry, Florida, by extending trains Nos. 73 and 74 from Thomasville (Ga.) to Perry (Fla.) that these two trains were operated as regular trains carrying passengers serving all local points between Perry and Georgia line from November 6, 1927, to December 4, 1928; that on December 4, 1928, after having received the consent of the Railroad Commission of the State of Florida, the defendant discontinued passenger trains No. 74 and No. 77, which said trains were the same passenger trains that were inaugurated by virtue of said Order of the Commission on November 6, 1927, and these trains were performing the same service heretofore performed by Trains Nos. 73 and 74 put on by virtue of Order No. 937 dated October 12, 1927, heretofore referred to. That as a substitute for said train the defendant inaugurated a through train known as the "SOUTHLAND" and operated under train Nos. 32 and 33. It was represented to the Commission that said train known as the "SOUTHLAND" would take care of passengers from Thomasville (Ga.), Monticello (Fla.) and Perry (Fla.); that the defendant has operated said passenger train known as the "SOUTHLAND" continuously since its inauguration on December 4, 1928, as a regular train carrying passengers, and said passenger train was not put on for special occasions such as fairs, carnivals, conventions, excursion and the like. That said train performs intrastate service picking up and discharging passengers at various points along the line of its operation within the State of Florida."

That the Railroad Commission has been advised by representative business men, Chambers of Commerce and other agencies, through letters, telegrams, protests and resolutions that it was the intention of the defendant to discontinue the operation of its said passenger train known *Page 282 as the "SOUTHLAND" operating over said "PERRY CUT-OFF" to the west coast of Florida on the 31st day of March, 1932, and requested the Commission to take such steps as it deemed necessary to prevent the discontinuance of such passenger train. * * * No definite written statement in reference to the discontinuance of this service was received by this Commission in response to * (its) letter (of inquiry as to such proposed discontinuance) but on April 28th, 1932, in an informal conference between officials of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and this Commission it was stated to this Commission that the defendant recognized no jurisdiction in this Commission over the discontinuance of the operation of this passenger train known as the "SOUTHLAND," as it was an interstate train, and that the defendant felt that it was within its rights to discontinue the operation of said passenger train at such time as its operation was no longer profitable to said defendant without applying to the Railroad Commission of Florida for consent to such discontinuance. It was further stated that this defendant was now operating this passenger train known as the "SOUTHLAND" at a loss. That at no time herein mentioned has the defendant submitted to the Railroad Commission of the State of Florida any application or petition for the discontinuance of such regular train carrying passengers now operated by it known as the "SOUTHLAND," nor has it submitted to said Commission any proposed change in the schedule of such passenger train, nor any proposed reduction in the service now rendered by such train, and at no time mentioned herein has the Railroad Commission of the State of Florida approved any application for consent to discontinue operation of such regular passenger train known as the "SOUTHLAND," nor has it approved any change in the schedule of said train, nor has it approved any reduction *Page 283 in the service now being performed within the State of Florida by such regular train carrying passengers known as, the "SOUTHLAND." That your orator is advised, believes, and, therefore, avers, that the defendant intends to discontinue the operation of said regular train carrying passengers between the points and stations on its line within the State of Florida known as the "SOUTHLAND," and operated under trains Nos. 32 and 33, without observing the law and the rules of the Railroad Commission by making written application to the Railroad Commission of the State of Florida for consent to discontinue such train. That your Orator is convinced from the statements made by officials of the defendant to it in the conferences above mentioned, and therefore avers, that it is the purpose of the defendant to discontinue the operation of said passenger train at an early date. That the statement of the defendant through its officials that it recognizes no jurisdiction in this Commission to pass on the question of whether or not the defendant is justified from discontinuing the operation of this regular train carrying passengers known as the "SOUTHLAND," indicates that it is the purpose and intent of said defendant to ignore and disregard the law and the rules of the said Railroad Commission of the State of Florida, and to discontinue the operation of said train without making written application for the consent of the said Railroad Commission of the State of Florida as is required by the valid rules of such Commission. That unless the Railroad Commission of the State of Florida is given information as to a proposed discontinuance of a regular train carrying passengers said Commission cannot give to the transportation of passengers that supervision and regulation required of them by the statute.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
143 So. 255, 106 Fla. 278, 1932 Fla. LEXIS 1013, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-c-l-r-r-co-v-state-fla-1932.