Public Service Commission v. Fox

96 Misc. 283, 160 N.Y.S. 59
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 15, 1916
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 96 Misc. 283 (Public Service Commission v. Fox) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Public Service Commission v. Fox, 96 Misc. 283, 160 N.Y.S. 59 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1916).

Opinion

Rudd, J.

The petition asks for an injunction restraining the defendant from operating a vehicle for the carrying of passengers for hire regularly each business day through, along and upon the streets of the city of Elmira, for the reason that defendant has neither obtained a certificate of public convenience and necessity as required by section 26 of the Transportation Corporations Law nor has defendant procured the consent of the local authorities of the city of Elmira.

The defendant admits the allegations of the petition as to failure to obtain certificate and local consent. The defendant is operating a horse drawn vehicle carrying passengers at a rate of fare of fifteen cents or less through the streets of Elmira. The capacity of the vehicle is thirty-three passengers.

Begular trips are made morning and evening.

The defendant attempts to justify his operation of this vehicle by showing that his passengers are the employees and only the employees of a certain manufacturing plant, that these employees have formed, under legal advice, a mutual transportation club” and that only members thereof ride, each paying when he does ride a fare of five cents."

All of which does not permit the defendant to ignore the requirement of the statute, which, for well considered and well understood reasons, must and should call upon this defendant to apply for and obtain from the local authorities of the city of Elmira permission thus to use its streets.

[285]*285Such a vehicle, while it may accommodate those who have the privilege to use it, is really under the conditions of present day traffic not altogether free from risks to those who are passengers nor is it lacking in elements of menace to other travelers upon the highway.

The local authorities are given by law the right to impose restrictions and conditions upon the use of city streets by such a vehicle, which constitutes in reality a bus line.

The defendant should also have a certificate of public convenience and necessity.

The prayer of the petition is granted and judgment may be entered accordingly.

Application granted.

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

Related

Weaver v. Public Service Commission
278 P. 542 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1929)
Mooney v. Tuckerman
144 A. 891 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1929)
Frost v. Railroad Commission
240 P. 26 (California Supreme Court, 1925)
People ex rel. Weatherwax v. Watt
115 Misc. 120 (New York Supreme Court, 1921)
United Traction Co. v. Smith
115 Misc. 73 (New York Supreme Court, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 Misc. 283, 160 N.Y.S. 59, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/public-service-commission-v-fox-nysupct-1916.