Bates v. Railroad Commission

Court of Appeals of Texas

Bates v. Railroad Commission

138 S.W.2d 1104, 1940 Tex. App. LEXIS 194

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 13, 1940

DocketNo. 8988.

StatusPublished

This text of 138 S.W.2d 1104 (Bates v. Railroad Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bates v. Railroad Commission, 138 S.W.2d 1104, 1940 Tex. App. LEXIS 194 (Tex. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

McClendon, chief justice.

Appeal from a final judgment of dismissal (after sustaining a general demurrer and Bates’s declining to amend) in a suit in which Bates sought to enjoin the Commission, its members, and certain other - officials and employees of the State, from; interfering with his operating over the state highways of twelve trucks, “in the-transportation of merchandise and freight for hire exclusively in interstate commerce-by motor vehicle.” Bates had no certificate, permit or other authorization from the Texas Commission to operate over Texas highways; but claimed the right to so operate under the “grandfather clause” of the Federal Motor Carrier Act 1935, 49 U.S.C. § 306, 49 U.S.C.A. § 306. The case is ruled by the decisions in McDonald v. Thompson, 305 U.S. 263, 59 S.Ct. 176, 83 L.Ed. 164; Winton v. Thompson, Tex.Civ.App., 123 S.W.2d 951, error refused; Railroad Comm. v. Tips, Tex.Civ.App., 130 S.W.2d 1078.

The trial court’s judgment is affirmed..

Affirmed.

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

McClendon, chief justice.

Appeal from a final judgment of dismissal (after sustaining a general demurrer and Bates’s declining to amend) in a suit in which Bates sought to enjoin the Commission, its members, and certain other - officials and employees of the State, from; interfering with his operating over the state highways of twelve trucks, “in the-transportation of merchandise and freight for hire exclusively in interstate commerce-by motor vehicle.” Bates had no certificate, permit or other authorization from the Texas Commission to operate over Texas highways; but claimed the right to so operate under the “grandfather clause” of the Federal Motor Carrier Act 1935, 49 U.S.C. § 306, 49 U.S.C.A. § 306. The case is ruled by the decisions in McDonald v. Thompson, 305 U.S. 263, 59 S.Ct. 176, 83 L.Ed. 164; Winton v. Thompson, Tex.Civ.App., 123 S.W.2d 951, error refused; Railroad Comm. v. Tips, Tex.Civ.App., 130 S.W.2d 1078.

The trial court’s judgment is affirmed..

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 S.W.2d 1104, 1940 Tex. App. LEXIS 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bates-v-railroad-commission-texapp-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack