Black Hills Stage Lines, Inc. v. Greyhound Corp.

118 N.W.2d 498, 174 Neb. 425, 1962 Neb. LEXIS 158
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 7, 1962
Docket35250
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 118 N.W.2d 498 (Black Hills Stage Lines, Inc. v. Greyhound Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Black Hills Stage Lines, Inc. v. Greyhound Corp., 118 N.W.2d 498, 174 Neb. 425, 1962 Neb. LEXIS 158 (Neb. 1962).

Opinion

Carter, J.

The Black Hills Stage Lines, Inc., of Norfolk, Nebraska, filed its application with the Nebraska State Railway Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing the transportation of passengers, mail, and express from Omaha to the point where U. S. Highway No. 385 crosses the Nebraska-South Dakota state line, serving all intermediate points as a common carrier. The commission granted the certificate as requested in the application.

The granting of the application was protested before the commission by the Greyhound Corporation, Omaha, Nebraska; Fred Larsen, Jr., doing business as Winner Bus Line, Winner, South Dakota; Gale Earl, doing business as Earl Bus Line, Chadron, Nebraska; and United Motor Ways, Inc., Grand Island, Nebraska. Upon the final grant of the certificate to Black Hills Stage Lines, Inc., the four named protestants appealed to this court.

The route sought for the operation applied for was from Omaha to the Nebraska-South Dakota state line via Fremont, Norfolk, O’Neill, Valentine, and Chadron. The Greyhound Corporation is authorized to serve a route from Omaha to Norfolk, via Fremont. The Winner Bus Line has authority to serve between Norfolk and O’Neill. Earl Bus Line has authority to serve between Valentine and Chadron. United Motor Ways, Inc., is authorized to serve between O’Neill and Valentine. From the foregoing it will be noted that the route from Omaha to Chadron is served by the four protestants. The evidence shows that there is no through bus from Chadron to Omaha and it is not possible to travel the entire route without numerous interchanges and long delays. The evidence shows that the elapsed time one way between Chadron and Omaha under existing schedules of the four *427 protestants is in excess of 32 hours. Under the proposed schedule of the applicant it would be less than 10x/% hours. It is not disputed that additional service is needed in the area west of O’Neill, no other means of transportation by common carrier being available. The record does not disclose a need for additional service east of O’Neill.

The evidence shows that an interested group of persons and civic organizations west of Norfolk organized themselves into a voluntary organization known as the Northern Nebraska Transportation Association. A committee of that organization contacted each of the protestants in an attempt to secure through service between Omaha, Nebraska, and Rapid City, South Dakota, by each or by joint operation. Protestants declined to provide such service individually although some appeared willing to furnish such service in conjunction with the others. The committee then contacted the Black Hills Stáge Lines, Inc., a new corporation whose officers and stockholders are officers of the Arrow Stage Lines, Inc., a bus transportation company operating in northeast Nebraska and connecting with the routes of three of the protestants. It is the contention of protestants that if the application of Black Hills Stage Lines, Inc., is granted, the route between Omaha and O’Neill should be restricted to protect the service provided in the area by Greyhound Corporation and Winner Bus Line. On the other hand, Black Hills Stage Lines, Inc., asserts that such restricted service between Omaha and O’Neill would make the through service between Omaha, Nebraska, and Rapid City, South Dakota, economically unfeasible, and that it could not and would not establish such, through service'unless certificates authorizing service to all intermediate points can be obtained from the Nebraska State Railway Commission, the South Dakota. Commission, and the Interstate Commerce Commission. The: problem presented appears to be one of first impression in this, state.

*428 The evidence sustains the following findings: There is a public need for through service west of O’Neill. There does not appear to be a public need for additional service between O’Neill and Omaha. The grant of a certificate of public convenience and necessity is not economically feasible without service to intermediate points between Omaha and Rapid City. The institution of the proposed through service will decrease the revenue now being obtained by Greyhound Corporation on its Omaha-Norfolk route, although it will not materially affect the revenue of its overall operations. The grant of the new certificate will reduce the revenue of Winner Bus Line, Earl Bus Line, and United Motor Ways, Inc., with a strong probability that one or more of them might be compelled to cease operations because of depleted revenue.

The purpose of the Nebraska Motor Carrier Act is stated in Shanks v. Watson Bros. Van Lines, 173 Neb. 829, 115 N. W. 2d 441, as follows: “The purpose of the Nebraska Motor Carrier Act was regulation for the pub.lic interest. Its purpose was not to stifle legitimate competition but to foster it. Its purpose was not to create monopolies in the transportation industry, but to eliminate discrimination, undue preferences or advantages, and unfair or destructive competitive practices. Legitimate competition is a normal attribute of our free enterprise system. It must be permitted to exist and the law contemplates that it shall.”

The protestants rely in part on Furstenberg v. Omaha & C. B. St. Ry. Co., 132 Neb. 562, 272 N. W. 756, and In re Application of Effenberger, 150 Neb. 13, 33 N. W. 2d 296. These cases deal with regulated monopolies in cities where competition is wasteful and in all likelihood would result in insufficient and unsatisfactory service and extravagant rates. A transportation company under :such a situation is ordinarily granted an exclusive franchise and requires the furnishing of all necessary service, the unprofitable as well as the profitable. A new *429 competition under such a situation will not ordinarily be permitted to compete in the lush areas of a city while the existing transportation system is required to render service in all parts of the city at rates fixed by the railway commission. These cases involve a principle not found in transportation problems in bus and truck operations outside of urban areas because they are not natural monopolies. The cited cases are not applicable to the situation before us for the reasons stated.

This court has consistently held: “In determining the issue of public convenience and necessity, controlling questions are whether the operation will serve a useful purpose responsive to a public demand or need; whether this purpose can or will be served as well by existing carriers; and whether it can be served by applicant in a specified manner without endangering or impairing the operations of existing carriers contrary to public interest.” Miller v. Consolidated Motor Freight, Inc., 168 Neb. 712, 97 N. W. 2d 265. See, also, Houk v. Peake, 162 Neb. 717, 77 N. W. 2d 310; Basin Truck Co, v. R. B. “Dick” Wilson, Inc., 166 Neb. 665, 90 N. W. 2d 268. The record discloses that the operation applied for will serve a useful purpose that is responsive to a public demand and need. It shows also that the service will not be adequately performed by existing carriers in the area. The question remaining for determination under the foregoing rule is whether or not the service to be performed by the applicant will endanger or impair the operations of existing carriers contrary to the public interest. We shall address ourselves to this question.

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

Related

Louisiana Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. v. PSC
549 So. 2d 850 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1989)
Renzenberger, Inc. v. Brown's Crew Car of Wyoming, Inc.
402 N.W.2d 294 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1987)
Red Carpet Limousine Service, Inc. v. Yellow Cab Co.
377 N.W.2d 91 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1985)
Amsberry, Inc. v. Wheeler Transport Service, Inc.
370 N.W.2d 109 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1985)
American Bus Lines, Inc. v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
308 N.W.2d 336 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1981)
RUAN TRANSP. CORP., DES MOINES v. Herman Bros., Inc.
220 N.W.2d 245 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1974)
Nebraska State Railway Commission v. Seward Motor Freight, Inc.
196 N.W.2d 200 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1972)
Wells Fargo Armored Service Corp. v. Bankers Dispatch Corp.
182 N.W.2d 648 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1971)
Simmerman v. National Trailer Convoy, Inc.
138 N.W.2d 481 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1965)
Greyhound Corp. v. American Buslines, Inc.
131 N.W.2d 664 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1964)
Application of Hagen Truck Lines, Inc.
119 N.W.2d 76 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
118 N.W.2d 498, 174 Neb. 425, 1962 Neb. LEXIS 158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/black-hills-stage-lines-inc-v-greyhound-corp-neb-1962.