47 F.2d 904 (S.D.Fla. ), 919, Alkazin v. Wells

Docket Nº:919.
Citation:47 F.2d 904
Party Name:ALKAZIN v. WELLS et al.
Court:United States District Courts, 11th Circuit, Southern District of Florida

Page 904

47 F.2d 904 (S.D.Fla.)

ALKAZIN

v.

WELLS et al.

No. 919.

United States District Court, S.D. Florida.

Date Not Given

Page 905

L. O. Casey and T. D. Ellis, Jr., both of Hollywood, Fla., and J. S. G. Gallagher, of Miami, Fla., for plaintiff.

Theo. T. Turnbull, of Tallahassee, Fla., for Railroad Commission of Florida.

Fred H. Davis, Atty. Gen., of Florida, for defendants.

Before WALKER, Circuit Judge, and DAWKINS and RITTER, District Judges.

WALKER, Circuit Judge.

This is an application for an interlocutory injunction restraining the institution or prosecution of any suit or proceeding to enforce against the plaintiff, his agents or employees, any provision of a Florida statute, enacted in the year 1929 (Laws 1929, c. 13700), and entitled:

'An Act Providing for the Supervision and Regulation of Persons, Firms, Corporations and Associations Owning, Controlling, Operating or Managing Motor Vehicles Used in the Business of Transporting Persons or Property for Compensation Over the Public Highways of the State; Defining Auto Transportation Companies and Providing Supervision and Regulation Thereof by the Railroad Commission of the State of Florida and Providing for the Enforcement of the Provisions of This Act and for the Punishment of Violations Thereof and Imposing a Mileage Tax and Providing for the Disposition of the Revenue Raised by the Same; and Repealing All Acts Inconsistent with the Provisions of This Act. ' Compiled General Laws of Florida, 1930 Supplement, p. 167 et seq.

The application was submitted on the bill and answer. From the bill it appears that the plaintiff is engaged in operating busses exclusively in the interstate transportation of passengers for hire from and to points in Florida to and from points in other states, in doing which he uses public roads and highways of the state of Florida, including federal-aid roads, and that he has not complied with and does not intend to comply with said statute or any of the provisions thereof, which are challenged on the grounds that they are violative of the commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States (article 1, Sec. 8, cl. 3), of the Fourteenth Amendment to that Constitution, of the Federal Aid Act (40 Stat. 1189), and the Federal Highway Act (42 Stat. 212 (23 USCA §§ 1-25)). That statute includes provisions to the following effect: That, with exceptions not material in this case, no person or corporation owning or operating any motor-propelled vehicle not usually operated on or over rails, used in the business of transporting persons or property for compensation or as a common carrier over any public highway in the state of Florida between fixed termini or over a regular route, shall operate such motor vehicle for the transportation of persons or property for compensation on any public highway of the state without having obtained from the Railroad...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP