Practitioners' Journal, Volume 28, Issue 1Association of Interstate Commerce Commission Practitioners., 1960 - Carriers |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
action applicant applicant's authority to transport bona fide operations certificate Chairman Winchell Chicago Commission's commodity rates common carrier Company competitive considered consignee Cont contract carrier convenience and necessity Corp court decisions delay denied District economic effect embraced equipment evidence existing carriers Ext.-Same filed Forwarder Class Freight Fwdg Grandfather grant of authority Hearing Examiner Hosmer Houston Inc.-Control Interstate Commerce Act Interstate Commerce Commission involved issue Jackson Parish lease Mason & Dixon ment merger Minn motor carrier Motor Frt Motor Lines movement National Trailer Convoy Ohio owner-operators Passenger Petroleum points practitioners present prior procedure proceedings proposed rate protestants public convenience public interest public utility question rail Railroad reasonable record regulation route Ruan Transport rules served shipments specific Storage Sub 9 substantial supporting shipper tariff tion traffic trailers transaction Transp Truck Lines vehicles vendor Watkins Motor Lines
Popular passages
Page 11 - Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept, for himself or his family, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties.
Page 56 - Commission may conduct its proceedings in such manner as will best conduce to the proper dispatch of business and to the ends of justice.
Page 71 - Railroad shall maintain and keep open all routes and channels of trade via existing junctions and gateways, unless and until otherwise authorized by the Commission.
Page 54 - Each division with regard to any case or matter assigned to it, or any question brought to it under this delegation of duty and authority, may call upon the whole Commission for advice and counsel, or for consideration of any case or question by an additional Commissioner or Commissioners assigned thereto; and the Commission may recall and bring before it as such any case, matter or question...
Page 10 - RESTRAINING CLIENTS FROM IMPROPRIETIES. A lawyer should use his best efforts to restrain and to prevent his clients from doing those things which the lawyer himself ought not to do, particularly with reference to their conduct towards Courts, judicial officers, jurors, witnesses and suitors. If a client persists in such wrongdoing the lawyer should terminate their relation.
Page 10 - To the extent that it acts in a quasi-judicial capacity, it is grossly improper for litigants, directly or through any counsel or representative, to communicate privately with a Commissioner, examiner, or other representative of the Commission about a pending cause, or to argue privately the merits thereof in the absence of their adversaries or without notice to them.
Page 102 - Provided, however, That no such certificate shall be issued to any common carrier of passengers by motor vehicle for operations over other than a regular route or routes, and between fixed termini, except as such carriers may be authorized to engage In special or charter operations.
Page 7 - A judge should not accept any presents or favors from litigants, or from lawyers practising before him or from others whose interests are likely to be submitted to him for judgment.
Page 10 - ... avoided. A lawyer should not communicate or argue privately with the Judge as to the merits of a pending cause, and he deserves rebuke and denunciation for any device or attempt to gain from a Judge special personal consideration or favor. A self-respecting independence in the discharge of professional duty, without denial or diminution of the courtesy and respect due the Judge's station, is the only proper foundation for cordial personal and official relations between Bench and Bar.
Page 69 - The question as to who has the right to control and direct must be answered in the light of all the facts and circumstances surrounding the transaction between the carrier and shipper, and of the actual practices in the conduct of the operation thereunder. No one element of such facts and circumstances is by itself conclusive.