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.

FOLLMER TRUCKING COMPANY v. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. (04/16/59)

April 16, 1959

FOLLMER TRUCKING COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION.



Appeals, Nos. 16 to 19, inclusive, March T., 1959, from orders of Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Application Docket No. 24885, Folder, 15, 16199, 16200, 16362, in case of Follmer Trucking Company v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. Orders affirmed.

COUNSEL

Harry H. Frank, with him Jefferson C. Barnhart, Sterling G. McNees, and McNees, Wallace & Nurick, for appellant.

William A. Goichman, Assistant Counsel, with him Thomas M. Kerrigan, Counsel, for Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, appellee.

Robert H. Shertz, with him Shertz, Barnes & Shertz, for intervening appellees.

Harry W. Speidel, with him Snyder, Balmer & Kershner, for intervening appellees.

Robert P. Falat, with him Lockwood W. Fogg, Jr., for intervening appellee.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, and Watkins, JJ. (hirt, J., absent).

Author: Rhodes

[ 189 Pa. Super. Page 207]

OPINION BY RHODES, P.J.

These four appeals from three related orders of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission of October 21, 1957, are by Follmer Trucking Company, a holder of certificates of public convenience from the commission.

A basic question involved on appeal is the extent of the hauling authority which had been allegedly granted to Follmer by the commission, or otherwise acquired. The present controversy as to Follmer's authority had its origin in three complaint proceedings

[ 189 Pa. Super. Page 208]

    brought by competing carriers.*fn1 The complaints alleged that Follmer had published rates, in violation of the Public Utility Law, in its Tariff Freight Pa. P.U.C. No. 22, effective May 28, 1953, which covered transportation of property between many points not authorized in its certificated authority.

Follmer held certificates of public convenience at A. 24885, Folders 5 and 13. During the course of the complaint proceedings, or on October 13, 1954, Follmer filed an application with the commission at A. 24885, Folder 15. The scope of this application is also an issue. In general, Follmer asked the consolidation, integration, and re-certification at new Folder 15 of certain rights which Follmer had or claimed to have or sought to have in a new consolidated certificate; and that upon approval of such application Class A authority at Folder 5 and the certificate at Folder 13 be canceled. Although they involved the common question of the extent of Follmer's certificated authority, the complaint and application proceedings were separate and distinct. Extensive hearings were held after which the commission issued separate orders. On October 21, 1957, the commission issued a combined order sustaining the complaints at C. 16199 and C. 16200, and an order sustaining the complaint of Highway Express Lines, Inc., at C. 16362. By order also entered on October 21, 1957, the commission denied Follmer's application at A. 24885, Folder 15. Thereupon Follmer filed a petition asking for rehearing and reconsideration in both the complaint and application proceedings. The commission, on March 3, 1958, refused Follmer's petition for rehearing. Follmer has

[ 189 Pa. Super. Page 209]

    appealed from the order denying the application at Folder 15 to this Court at No. 16, March Term, 1959, and it has appealed from the orders sustaining the complaints against it at Nos. 17, 18, 19, March Term, 1959.

The extent of Follmer's authority, as shown by the history of its certificates at A. 24885, Folders 5 and 13, is the issue in both the complaint and application proceedings. Although the complaint proceeding preceded the application proceeding chronologically, the issues can be more readily understood from a review of the application proceeding; therefore we shall consider first the appeal at No. 16, March Term, 1959.

Follmer Trucking Company began service in 1932. At present Follmer employs a total of 295 persons and operates 340 pieces of equipment consisting of 33 straight trucks, 109 tractors, 186 trailers, and 12 service cars and trucks. Follmer claims that the present application at A. 24885, Folder 15, filed October 13, 1954, was for the purpose of consolidation, integration, and re-certification in a new Folder 15 of all Class A rights held by Follmer at Folder 5 and of all the rights at Folder 13.

Follmer's authority at Folder 5, existing since 1937, had been amended on October 9, 1941, and on June 15, 1948. The commission has stated that the primary route under Folder 5 ran from Lock Haven through Williamsport, Sunbury, Shamokin, Pottsville, Hamburg, Allentown, and Reading to Philadelphia, with an alternate route along the Susquehanna River through Harrisburg and Lancaster to Philadelphia. Certain spur and additional routes were granted by the 1941 and 1948 amendments at Folder 5. In the application at Folder 13, ...


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.