Florida Motor Lines, Inc. v. State Railroad Commission

Decision Date03 March 1931
PartiesFLORIDA MOTOR LINES, Inc. v. STATE RAILROAD COMMISSION (GEORGIAFLORIDA MOTOR LINES, Inc., et al., Interveners).
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

En Banc.

Certiorari to Railroad Commission of Florida.

Certiorari by the Florida Motor Lines, Inc., to review an order of the Railroad Commission, wherein the Georgia-Florida Motor Lines Inc., and its successor, the Interstate Transit, Inc., were permitted to intervene.

Writ of certiorari quashed.

ELLIS and TERRELL, JJ., dissenting.

Syllabus by the Court.

SYLLABUS

Primarily the vehicular highways of the state are designed for general public transportation and not for conducting thereon the business of transporting persons or property for compensation.

The power of Congress over interstate commerce and post roads and as to federal instrumentalities is not subject to state authority; but the state may forbid the use of its public highways in the business of transportation for hire even in interstate commerce, if no unjust discrimination is thereby perpetrated and federal instrumentalities are not hindered.

The state may permit, limit, and regulate the use of its public roads for transportation thereon for hire, whether intra or inter state, provided no unjust discrimination is practiced and no undue burden or interference is put upon interstate commerce, and federal instrumentalities are not interfered with.

In the absence of paramount federal regulations, the number and the nature, size, weight, and operation of the vehicles that may be used in transportation for hire on the public highways of the state may be regulated by statute even as to interstate commerce over such highways, where such commerce is not discriminated against or unduly burdened.

Chapter 13700, Laws of Florida, contemplates: (1) The conservation of the highways constructed by taxation and other public funds in the state for the use of the public for transportation purposes; (2) the safety of persons, and property in the use of the highways; (3) a limited and regulated use of motor vehicles on the highways by persons and corporations engaged in the business of transportation for compensation on such highways only as the public convenience and necessity may require.

An intent of chapter 13700, Laws of Florida, is the permissive limited and not unjustly discriminating use of the highways in the business of transportation for hire, only as the public necessity and convenience may require, and only as such use does not unduly impair the roads or the safety of their use by the public.

Chapter 13700 also intends that the business of established transportation companies, affording similar service in the same territory over roads provided and maintained by them and not by taxation or other public funds, shall not be impaired further than as it results from permissible motor vehicle transportation for hire on the public highways as the convenience and necessity of the public may require.

Chapter 13700 intends that, before a certificate is issued permitting the use of motor vehicles on the public roads in the business of transportation for hire, it shall be affirmatively shown by appropriate evidence and duly found that the public convenience and necessity require the particular service sought to be authorized.

In determining whether the public convenience and necessity require a proposed service to be rendered by the use of vehicles for hire on the public highways, there should be considered (1) whether the character and number of proposed vehicles may be operated without undue jeopardy to those traveling upon the roads, or to the structure and safety of the roads; (2) whether service of a like nature is being rendered in the territory or over the route or schedule line by similar or other means of transportation that is adequate to meet the reasonable requirements of the public convenience and necessity; (3) whether the service in the territory or over the route or schedule line as proposed so differs in matters affecting public convenience and necessity, from other similar service being rendered, as to justify authorizing the additional or different service, in view of the rights of other carriers under the statute and of the taxpayers and general public in conserving the structure and safety of the highways.

Chapter 13700 (section 3) expressly provides that in granting an application for a certificate 'the Commission may take into consideration * * * the effect that the granting of such certificate may have upon other transportation facilities within the territory sought to be served by such applicant and also the effect upon transportation as a whole within said territory.'; and that, 'when application is made by an Auto Transportation Company for a certificate to operate in a territory or on a line already served by a certificate holder under this Act the Commission shall grant same only when the existing certificate holder or holders serving such territory fail to provide service and facilities to the satisfaction of said Commission.'

While the railroad commissioners are statutory officers, and they can exercise only such governmental authority and functions as are provided for by the express or implied provisions of statutes, under the statute (Acts 1929, c. 13700, § 8) the orders duly made by the Railroad Commission 'shall be deemed and held to be * * * reasonable and just and such as ought to have been made in the premises, and to have been properly made and arrived at in due form of procedure, * * * unless the contrary plainly appears.'

If it be duly shown that an order made by the Railroad Commission is without statutory authority, or is without a sufficient predicate in the proceedings wherein the order was made, or is otherwise contrary to law, it may be adjudged to be ineffectual in appropriate judicial procedure; otherwise the order should be enforced until its invalidity is duly shown.

The validity of an order made by the Railroad Commission may be determined by a consideration of its terms and of the record of the proceedings in which the order was made.

Permission to substitute twenty-four passenger busses for seven-passenger sedans in the business of transportation for hire upon the public highways is not an original authority to operate on a line, but is authority to increase the capacity for service already being rendered.

A mere failure of the railroad commissioners to state upon the record that they considered matters which the statute provides they may consider in making an order does not necessarily render the order invalid if the findings and the order made are duly supported.

The law does not give common carriers immunity from competition; but chapter 13700, Laws of Florida, does not authorize the business of common carriers who provide their own roads to be impaired by competition from carriers for hire who use the public roads of the state further than the public convenience and necessity may require.

The authority to determine the nature and extent of bus and truck service for compensation on the public highway that should be permitted is by the statute committed to the Railroad Commission, subject to such limitations as are afforded by the rather general provisions of the statute and to the provisions and principles of law that secure public and private rights against an arbitrary exercise or abuse of governmental authority, through appropriate judicial review in accord with the organic provision that right and justice shall be administered by due course of law.

The findings and conclusions of the railroad commissioners under chapter 13700, Laws of Florida, may be reviewed on certiorari, but such review is not appellate to determine whether error was committed in such findings and conclusions as where writ of error or appeal is authorized and used.

The review on certiorari is to determine whether an order as made by the Railroad Commission is illegal as matter of law or was made without observing the provisions of law regulating the matters to be considered or the procedure for the findings and conclusions, or whether in its operation the order will violate organic or fundamental rights, or is merely arbitrary without sufficient support in the evidence or proceedings had.

If there is substantial competent evidence that is legally sufficient to support the findings and conclusions of the Railroad Commission, and no rule of law was violated in the proceedings, and the whole record does not show an abuse of authority or arbitrary action, the findings and conclusions of the Railroad Commission will not be set aside on certiorari even though the reviewing court might have reached different conclusions on the evidence.

Where the essential provisions of an order of the Railroad Commission are not clearly shown to violate the intendments of the statute under which it was made, or to violate any organic or statutory rights, a writ of certiorari issued to review the order will be quashed.

COUNSEL

Knight, Thompson & Turner, of Tampa, and Robert H. Anderson, of Jacksonville, for petitioner.

Stanton Walker, of Jacksonville, and T. T. Turnbull, of Tallahassee, for respondent.

Chapter 13700, Acts of 1929, contains the following provisions:

'Section 2. No auto transportation company shall operate any motor vehicle for the transportation of persons or property for compensation on any public highway in this State without first having obtained from the Railroad Commission a certificate that the present or future public convenience and necessity requires or will require such operation, but no certificate shall be required for operation exclusively within the limits of an incorporated city or town. The Railroad Commission
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 cases
  • State ex rel. Interstate Transit Lines v. Public Service Commission
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • June 19, 1939
    ... ... Burlington Transportation Co. has no right of priority in ... motor bus operation based upon the Burlington Railroad's ... established ... Convenience, 36 Yale Law Journal, 163, note 111; Florida ... Motor Lines, Inc., v. R. R. Comm., 101 Fla. 1018, 132 ... So. 851; ... ...
  • Tamiami Trail Tours v. Carter
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • October 26, 1954
    ...Truck Lines v. Railroad Commission, 118 Fla. 526, 160 So. 22; In re Edwards, 100 Fla. 989, 130 So. 615; Florida Motor Lines v. Railroad Commission, 101 Fla. 1018, 132 So. 851; and Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 149 Fla. 245, 5 So.2d Not only do orders of the Commission e......
  • Yazoo & M. v. R. Co. v. Mississippi Railroad Commission
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • February 12, 1934
    ... ... certificate of convenience and necessity to the Motor ... Transportation Company, Inc. From a judgment of the ... 248, 141 N.E. 12; C ... R. I. & P Ry. Co. v. State, 123 Okla. 190, 252 P. 849; ... Abbott v. Public Utilities ... 450; Red Star Transp. Co. v. Red Dot ... Coach Lines et al. (Ky.), 295 S.W. 420, 421; Eager ... v. Public ... Florida ... Motor Lines, Inc. v. State Railroad Commission, 132 ... ...
  • Becker v. Merrill
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 19, 1944
    ...by this court in Florida Motor Lines, Inc. v. Railroad Commissioners, 100 Fla. 538, 129 So. 876, and again in same styled case in 101 Fla. 1018, 132 So. 851. These have frequently been cited with approval. See Tamiami Trail Tours v. Florida Railroad Commission, 128 Fla. 25, 174 So. 451; Sta......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT