Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission, 19438
| Citation | 258 S.C. 518,189 S.E.2d 296 |
| Decision Date | 07 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 19438,19438 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | CHEMICAL LEAMAN TANK LINES, INC., Appellant, v. The SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, Respondent. |
R. M. Jefferies, Jr., and Thomas M. Boulware, of Brown, Jefferies & Boulware, Barnwell, for appellant.
Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod, and Asst. Atty. Gen., William F. Austin, Columbia, for respondent.
This is an appeal from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Richland County refusing to vacate or set aside orders of the South Carolina Public Service Commission granting an amended class 'E' Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Infinger Transportation Company, Inc.
Infinger's class 'E' certificate had previously authorized motor freight service over irregular routes as follows:
'Liquid chemicals in tank vehicles: From points and places in Charleston County to points and places in South Carolina, for Koppers Company, Inc.; and, from points and places in Charleston and Berkeley Counties to points and places in South Carolina, and from Hampton and York Counties to points and places in Charleston and Berkeley Counties and between York County and points and places in South Carolina, for Burris Chemical Company.
'Sulphate black liquor skimmings in tank vehicles: From points in Florence County, S.C., to points in Charleston County, S.C.'
On March 23, 1970, Infinger filed an application with the Commission to amend this certificate to read as follows:
'Liquid chemicals in tank vehicles: From points and places in Charleston, Berkeley, and York Counties to points and places in South Carolina, and from Hampton County to points and places in Charleston and Berkeley Counties.
'Sulphate black liquor skimmings in tank vehicles: From points in Florence County to points and places in Charleston County, S.C.'
At a hearing held by the Commission, Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. and Schwerman Trucking Company appeared to protest the application. By order dated May 19, 1970, the Commission granted the application 'in order to better serve the requirements of public conveniences and necessity.' Thereafter, the protestants petitioned for and were granted a hearing. A subsequent order of the Commission affirmed its earlier order, with the Commission concluding that Infinger's additional service 'will not seriously affect protestants' operations in this state and will allow applicant the opportunity to serve the public.'
Chemical Leaman commenced this action for a review of the Commission's orders. From an order of the lower court dismissing the complaint, Chemical Leaman appeals.
At the outset, we reiterate the scope of this Court's review of orders of the Public Service Commission:
'In our consideration of the issues here presented the governing principle, well settled by many decisions of this Court, is that orders of the Public Service Commission issued under the powers and authority vested in it have the force and effect of law; that the Commission's findings of fact are presumptively correct and its orders presumptively reasonable and valid; that this Court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the Commission upon a question as to which there is room for a difference of intelligent opinion; and that, therefore, an order of the Commission such as is here involved will not be set aside except upon a convincing showing that it is without evidence to support it or that it embodies arbitrary or capricious action as a matter of law.' Petroleum Transportation, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 255 S.C. 419, 179 S.E.2d 326 (1971), quoting Long Motor Lines v. S.C.P.S.C., 233 S.C. 67, 103 S.E.2d 762 (1958), Pee Dee Elec. Co-op. v. Public Service Commission, 229 S.C. 155, 92 S.E.2d 171 (1956), and other authority.
The question for determination,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Palmetto Alliance, Inc. v. South Carolina Public Service Com'n
...upon a question as to which there is room for a difference of intelligent opinion....' Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. v. S.C. Public Service Commission, 258 S.C. 518, 189 S.E.2d 296, 298 (1972). The Commission's orders are presumptively correct. South Carolina Electric and Gas Co. v. Publ......
-
Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Public Service Commission
...to support or that it embodies arbitrary or capricious action as a matter of law." Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission, 258 S.C. 518, 189 S.E.2d 296 (1972). We turn now to the specific questions raised by this FAIR RATE OF RETURN Southern Bell charge......
-
Hamm v. Public Service Com'n of South Carolina
...for a difference of intelligent opinion. Hamm v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., supra; Chemical Leaman Tank Lines v. South Carolina Public Service Comm'n, 258 S.C. 518, 189 S.E.2d 296 (1972). The burden is on the respondents to show convincingly that the orders of the Commission are wi......
-
State v. Jackson
...is inapplicable because it merely states the scope of review of an action by the Public Service Commission is an administrative law action. Id. In addition, Jackson cites State v. Hamilton, 344 S.C. 344, 543 S.E.2d 286 (Ct. App. 2001), overruled by State v. Gentry, 363 S.C. 93, 610 S.E.2d 4......