Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

LANCASTER TRANSP. CO. ET AL. v. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION ET AL. (07/19/51)

July 19, 1951

LANCASTER TRANSP. CO. ET AL.
v.
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION ET AL.



COUNSEL

Windolph & Johnstone, Lancaster, for Lancaster Transp. Co.

Robert C. Fluhrer, York, for York Motor Express and Keystone Express & Storage Co.

McNees, Wallace & Nurick, James H. Booser, Harrisburg, for Motor Freight Express.

K. L. Shirk, Sr., Lancaster, for Ephrata Motor Express.

John W. Mentzer, Asst. Counsel, William J. Grove, Asst. Counsel, Charles E. Thomas, Counsel, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Harrisburg, Robert H. Shertz (of Shertz, Barnes & Shertz), Philadelphia, for Highway Express Lines, Inc., Shirk's Motor Express Corp., intervening appellees.

Before Rhodes, P. J., and Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross, Arnold and Gunther, JJ.

Author: Rhodes

[ 169 Pa. Super. Page 286]

RHODES, President Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission dismissing complaint against an interchange service at West Chester, Pennsylvania, instituted by Highway Express Lines, Inc., and Shirk's Motor Express Corporation. The effect of the order is to permit the two connecting local carriers by motor truck to fully interchange shipments and establish joint haul practices, under the Commission's General Order No. 29, as construed by the Commission, without any proceeding to determine public necessity for the interchange and the resulting new service.

The present proceeding had its origin in a complaint filed with the Commission on November 10, 1949, by Lancaster Transportation Company, York Motor Express Company, Keystone Express and Storage Company,

[ 169 Pa. Super. Page 287]

Motor Freight Express, and Ephrata Motor Express, common carriers by motor vehicle. In the complaint it was averred that the interchange service of Highway Express Lines, Inc., and Shirk's Motor Express Corporation was unlawful. With the exception of Ephrata Motor Express, all of the complainants are authorized to transport property between the city of Lancaster and the City of Philadelphia. The facts alleged in the complaint were admitted, but the conclusion was denied. The motion to dismiss the complaint having been granted, the complainants have appealed.

Highway Express Lines, Inc., operates as a class D carrier under a certificate originally issued in 1938 to Horlacher Delivery Service. The rights thereby granted and pertinent to this proceeding are to transport property between points in Philadelphia and the area surrounding Philadelphia included within a line passing through, inter alia, West Chester, Phoenixville, Coatesville, Perkasie, Newtown, Morrisville, and Marcus Hook. Shirk's Motor Express Corporation holds a certificate of public convenience granted in 1948 which, inter alia, authorizes it to transport property as a class A carrier between the City of Lancaster or other Lancaster County points and the Borough of West Chester, subject to a number of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.