Village of Paulding v. Public Utilities Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Village of Paulding v. Public Utilities Commission

4 N.E.2d 694, 132 Ohio St. 33, 132 Ohio St. (N.S.) 33, 7 Ohio Op. 65, 1936 Ohio LEXIS 241

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 12, 1936

Docket25978

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 N.E.2d 694 (Village of Paulding v. Public Utilities Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Village of Paulding v. Public Utilities Commission, 4 N.E.2d 694, 132 Ohio St. 33, 132 Ohio St. (N.S.) 33, 7 Ohio Op. 65, 1936 Ohio LEXIS 241 (Ohio 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

This cause came on to be heard upon the transcript of the record of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, and was argued by counsel.

Appellee, The New York Central Railroad Company, as lessee of The Cincinnati Northern Railroad Company, filed with the Public Utilities Commission an application to discontinue one round-trip, daily except Sunday, passenger service, furnished by an electromotor train, between Van Wert, Ohio, and the Ohio- *34 Michigan state line, the northern terminus of the operation being at Jackson, Michigan. (For report of a former proceeding involving discontinuance of service between the Ohio-Michigan state line and Middletown, Ohio, see New York Central Rd. Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, 129 Ohio St., 381, 195 N. E., 566, wherein this court held that the order of the commission denying that application to abandon that service was not, unlawful or unreasonable.)

The commission, after hearing the evidence, granted the application to abandon passenger service, and denied an application for rehearing. Appellants took an appeal from that order to this court.

Under Section 504-3, General Code, the Public Utilities Commission is empowered to permit the abandonment of railroad service when the facts satisfy the commission that the withdrawal of service is reasonable, having due regard for the welfare of the public and the cost of operating the service. From a review of the record in this proceeding this court is of opinion that the order of the Public Utilities Commission is supported by the evidence and is not unlawful or unreasonable.

It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged that the order of the Public Utilities Commission be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

Order affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Jones, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur. Williams and Matthias, JJ., not participating.

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

This cause came on to be heard upon the transcript of the record of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, and was argued by counsel.

Appellee, The New York Central Railroad Company, as lessee of The Cincinnati Northern Railroad Company, filed with the Public Utilities Commission an application to discontinue one round-trip, daily except Sunday, passenger service, furnished by an electromotor train, between Van Wert, Ohio, and the Ohio- *34 Michigan state line, the northern terminus of the operation being at Jackson, Michigan. (For report of a former proceeding involving discontinuance of service between the Ohio-Michigan state line and Middletown, Ohio, see New York Central Rd. Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, 129 Ohio St., 381, 195 N. E., 566, wherein this court held that the order of the commission denying that application to abandon that service was not, unlawful or unreasonable.)

The commission, after hearing the evidence, granted the application to abandon passenger service, and denied an application for rehearing. Appellants took an appeal from that order to this court.

Under Section 504-3, General Code, the Public Utilities Commission is empowered to permit the abandonment of railroad service when the facts satisfy the commission that the withdrawal of service is reasonable, having due regard for the welfare of the public and the cost of operating the service. From a review of the record in this proceeding this court is of opinion that the order of the Public Utilities Commission is supported by the evidence and is not unlawful or unreasonable.

It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged that the order of the Public Utilities Commission be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

Order affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Jones, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur. Williams and Matthias, JJ., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 N.E.2d 694, 132 Ohio St. 33, 132 Ohio St. (N.S.) 33, 7 Ohio Op. 65, 1936 Ohio LEXIS 241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/village-of-paulding-v-public-utilities-commission-ohio-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack