Appeals, Nos. 120, 143, 144 and 158, Oct. T., 1955, from order of Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Application Docket No. 69239, Folder 1, Am-E, Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. et al. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission and Joseph R. Prostko, trading as Altoona-Pittsburgh Freight Line. Record returned.
Paul F. Barnes, with him Shertz, Barnes & Shertz, for appellant.
James H. Booser, with him McNees, Wallace & Nurick, for appellant.
William J. Wilcox, for appellant.
Leo Daniels, with him Prichard, Lawler & Geltz, for intervening appellee.
Edward Munce, Assistant Counsel, with him Thomas Kerrigan, Acting Counsel, for Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission.
Before Rhodes, P.j., Hirt, Ross, Gunther, Wright, Woodside, and Ervin, JJ.
[ 180 Pa. Super. Page 64]
These appeals are from an order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission of March 14, 1955. The applicant, Joseph R. Prostko, trading and doing business as Altoona-Pittsburgh Freight Line, at Application Docket No. 69239, Folder 1, Amendment E, sought authority to extend his presently certificated class A right as a motor carrier existing between Pittsburgh and the Hollidaysburg-Altoona-Tyrone area, eastward to Huntingdon, Mt. Union, Lewistown, Reedsville, Mifflintown, and Mifflin; and further to allow applicant the right to serve the Borough of Bellwood as an off-route point along applicant's presently existing route between Cresson and Tyrone. Applicant also sought authority to transport property from points in the County of Allegheny to points on the proposed extension, spur routes, and the off-route point of Bellwood, and vice versa.
Applicant filed his application at Amendment E on July 31, 1953. Protests were filed, inter alia, by Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., Motor Freight Express, Hartman's Transportation Company, and J. H. Snyder, Jr., t/a Rural Motor Express, the present appellants.
On January 4, 1955, extensive hearings having been held, the commission, one commissioner dissenting, approved the application by short form order. Protestants petitioned the commission for supersedeas and rehearing. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., one of the protestants, later withdrew its petition and took its appeal to this Court at No. 120, October Term, 1955, and petitioned the Court for an order of supersedeas. On January 31, 1955, the commission denied the remaining petitions for supersedeas and rehearing, whereupon protestants, Motor ...