State ex rel. and to Use of Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Public Service Com'n

• Decision Date: 08 July 1930
• Docket Number: 29172-29175
• Citation: 30 S.W.2d 112,325 Mo. 862
• Parties: The State at Relation and to Use of Kansas City Southern Railway Company, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission et al. the State at Relation and to Use of Sheffield Steel Corporation, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission, Thomas Brown et al., and Kansas City, Intervener. the State at Relation and to Use of St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission et al. the State at Relation and to Use of Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission et al
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

30 S.W.2d 112

325 Mo. 862

The State at Relation and to Use of Kansas City Southern Railway Company, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission et al. the State at Relation and to Use of Sheffield Steel Corporation, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission, Thomas Brown et al., and Kansas City, Intervener. the State at Relation and to Use of St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission et al. the State at Relation and to Use of Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, Appellant, v. Public Service Commission et al

Nos. 29172-29175

Supreme Court of Missouri

July 8, 1930

Reported at 325 Mo. 862 at 879.

Original Opinion of July 8, 1930, Reported at 325 Mo. 862.

Gantt J. Ragland, C. J., and White, Walker and Atwood, JJ., concur.

OPINION

GANTT

On Motion to Modify

Respondent (Public Service Commission) and intervener (Kansas City) move the court to modify its opinion by remanding the cause with directions to affirm the order as to the Kansas City Public Service Co. (Street Car Co.), and all appellants and to quash the order as to the Sheffield Steel Corporation. In the opinion we held that the apportionments of the cost of the proposed viaduct to the Kansas City Public Service Co., St Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. and the Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. were reasonable and lawful. We further held that the Public Service Commission was without personal jurisdiction of the Sheffield Steel Corporation, and for that reason reversed and remanded the cause with directions to quash the order of the Commission.

By an amended motion to modify, it appears that Kansas City "to prevent further delay in the prosecution of the work of constructing said viaduct, consents that the said portion of the cost of said viaduct, which was assessed by the Commission against the city, be increased so as to include and absorb that portion of the cost of said viaduct which was assessed by the Commission against the Sheffield Steel Corporation."

The Kansas City Public Service Co. (Street Car Co.) did not appeal from the judgment of the circuit court affirming the order and did not appear in this court. Of course, the Sheffield Steel Corporation is not resisting the motion, and the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company filed no suggestions in opposition. However, the St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. and the Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. contend the reviewing court can only affirm or reverse an order of the Commission, citing Section 10522, Revised Statutes 1919, which follows:

" . . Upon such hearing the circuit court shall enter judgment either affirming or setting aside the order of the commission under review. In case said order is reversed by reason of the commission failing to receive testimony properly proffered, the court shall remand the cause to the commission, with instructions to receive the testimony so proffered and rejected, and enter a new order based upon the evidence theretofore taken, and such as it is directed to receive. The court may, in its discretion, remand any cause which is reversed by it to the commission for further action. No court of this State, except the circuit courts to the extent herein specified and the supreme court on appeal, shall have jurisdiction to review, reverse, correct or annul any order or decision of the commission or to suspend or delay the executing or operation thereof, or to enjoin, restrain or interfere with the commission in the performance of its official duties. The circuit courts of the State shall always be deemed open for the trial of suits brought to...