State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. Fox

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. Fox

73 S.E.2d 464, 236 N.C. 553, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 601

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 26, 1952

Docket532

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 73 S.E.2d 464 (State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. Fox) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. Fox, 73 S.E.2d 464, 236 N.C. 553, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 601 (N.C. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

DeviN, C. J.

Tbe General Assembly has constituted tbe North Carolina Utilities Commission, for certain enumerated purposes, a court of record, with right of appeal therefrom to tbe Superior Court, and has prescribed tbe procedure, scope and extent of review on such appeal. Ob. 989, Session Laws 1949, now codified as G.S. 62-26.10. Tbe Superior Court is authorized to review tbe proceedings without a jury, and such review shall be confined to tbe record as certified, except as to certain matters not here pertinent, and “tbe court shall decide all relevant questions of law.” Utilities Com. v. R. R., 235 N.C. 273, 69 S.E. 2d 502. “Appeals from tbe Utilities Commission are confined to questions of law, and on appeal tbe appellant may not rely upon any grounds for relief *558 wbieb are not set forth in his petition for rehearing by the Commission.” Utilities Com. v. Coach Co., 233 N.C. 119, 63 S.E. 2d 113.

When the appeal from the order of the Utilities Commission in the instant case was duly prosecuted and presented to the Superior Court, the extent of the review was limited to the record as certified and to the questions of law therein presented. There is no provision for additional findings of fact by the judge for the purpose of determining the validity of the order of the Utilities Commission brought in question.

Here it appears the trial judge made findings of fact and upon the findings so made rendered judgment that the order of the Commission was null and void.

Without undertaking at this time and in this state of the record to determine the questions sought to he presented for decision, we deem it proper to remand the case to the Superior Court for judgment on the questions of law presented by the record as certified, or for remand to the Utilities Commission for additional findings if any may he deemed necessary.

Remanded.

PaRkee, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

DeviN, C. J.

Tbe General Assembly has constituted tbe North Carolina Utilities Commission, for certain enumerated purposes, a court of record, with right of appeal therefrom to tbe Superior Court, and has prescribed tbe procedure, scope and extent of review on such appeal. Ob. 989, Session Laws 1949, now codified as G.S. 62-26.10. Tbe Superior Court is authorized to review tbe proceedings without a jury, and such review shall be confined to tbe record as certified, except as to certain matters not here pertinent, and “tbe court shall decide all relevant questions of law.” Utilities Com. v. R. R., 235 N.C. 273, 69 S.E. 2d 502. “Appeals from tbe Utilities Commission are confined to questions of law, and on appeal tbe appellant may not rely upon any grounds for relief *558 wbieb are not set forth in his petition for rehearing by the Commission.” Utilities Com. v. Coach Co., 233 N.C. 119, 63 S.E. 2d 113.

When the appeal from the order of the Utilities Commission in the instant case was duly prosecuted and presented to the Superior Court, the extent of the review was limited to the record as certified and to the questions of law therein presented. There is no provision for additional findings of fact by the judge for the purpose of determining the validity of the order of the Utilities Commission brought in question.

Here it appears the trial judge made findings of fact and upon the findings so made rendered judgment that the order of the Commission was null and void.

Without undertaking at this time and in this state of the record to determine the questions sought to he presented for decision, we deem it proper to remand the case to the Superior Court for judgment on the questions of law presented by the record as certified, or for remand to the Utilities Commission for additional findings if any may he deemed necessary.

Remanded.

PaRkee, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 S.E.2d 464, 236 N.C. 553, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-utilities-commission-v-fox-nc-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack