CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - INTERSTATE COMMERCE - MOTOR CARRIER OPERATING WITHIN - SINGLE STATE AS A LINK IN INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION

Authors

Paul G. Kauper, University of Michigan Law School

Abstract

The plaintiff was engaged in business as a common carrier of goods by motor vehicle. He transported goods between the docks of Los Angeles harbor and points in and around Los Angeles, but all the goods which he carried were originally shipped in from or were consigned to destinations outside the State. His operations, however, were independent of the operations of connecting carriers. The California Railroad Commission ordered the plaintiff to cease operations until he secured a certificate of public convenience and necessity. Held, on review, that the plaintiff was engaged in interstate commerce, and that the Commission's order was invalid. Langdon, J., wrote a dissenting opinion, concurred in by Waste, C. J., and Shenk, J. Meyers v. Railroad Commission, (Cal. 1933) 23 Pac. (2d) 26.

Recommended Citation

Paul G. Kauper, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - INTERSTATE COMMERCE - MOTOR CARRIER OPERATING WITHIN - SINGLE STATE AS A LINK IN INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION, 32 Mich. L. Rev. 266 (1933).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol32/iss2/13