Bruder v. Public Utilities Commission

235 N.E.2d 238, 14 Ohio St. 2d 24, 43 Ohio Op. 2d 13, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 411
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 27, 1968·No. No. 41138·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant’s contention, that Rule 1.04 (d) of the Rules and Regulations of the Public Utilities Commission is invalid on the ground that it violates Section 16 of Article I of the Ohio Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is without merit.

Upon consideration of the record, this court holds that the order of the commission denying applicant’s application [25] is neither unreasonable nor unlawful. Section 4903.13, Revised Code; H. & K. Motor Transportation, Inc., v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1939), 135 Ohio St. 145, 19 N. E. 2d 956; Jones v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1943), 141 Ohio St. 237, 47 N. E. 2d 780.

Therefore, the order of the Public Utilities Commission is affirmed.

Order affirmed.

Taft, C. J., ZxmmebmaN, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, SchNeider and BrowN, JJ., concur.

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

Bruder v. Public Utilities Commission, 235 N.E.2d 238, 14 Ohio St. 2d 24, 43 Ohio Op. 2d 13, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 411 (Ohio 1968).

235 N.E.2d 238 (Bruder v. Public Utilities Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bertolini v. Public Utilities Commission
307 N.E.2d 907 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1974)