ST. LOUIS & S. F. RY. CO. v. STATE

Annotate this Case

ST. LOUIS & S. F. RY. CO. v. STATE
1909 OK 244
105 P. 351
24 Okla. 805
Case Number: 820
Decided: 10/07/1909
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

ST. LOUIS & S. F. RY. CO.
v.
STATE et al.

Syllabus

¶0 1. CARRIERS--Regulation by Corporation Commission--Review by Courts.--An appeal will lie to the Supreme Court of the state from the action of the Corporation Commission prescribing rates, charges, or classifications of traffic or affecting the train schedule of any transportation company, or requiring additional facilities, conveniences, or public service of any transportation or transmission company, or refusing to approve a suspending bond, or requiring additional security thereon, or an increase thereof.
2. RAILROADS--Regulation by Corporation Commission--Review by Courts. An appeal will not lie to the Supreme Court of the state to review the action of the Corporation Commission in requiring all railroad companies and street car companies operating within the state, upon the happening of an accident, to send report thereof, both by telegraph and mail, to the Corporation Commission at its office in Guthrie.

Appeal from Corporation Commission.

From the action of the State Corporation Commission requiring railroad and street railway companies, upon the happening of an accident, to send a report thereof, both by telegram and letter, to the Corporation Commission, the St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Company appeals. Appeal dismissed.

W. F. Evans, R. A. Kleinschmidt, and Dale & Bierer, for appellant.
G. A. Henshaw, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

WILLIAMS, J.

¶1 The appellees, through their attorney, move to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the court has not jurisdiction thereof. The only authority that this court has to entertain an appeal from the Corporation Commission is by virtue of section 20, art. 9 (section 231, Bunn's Ed.) of the Constitution, which provides that:

"From any action of the commission prescribing rates, charges, or classifications of traffic, or affecting the train schedule of any transportation company, or requiring additional facilities, conveniences, or public service of any transportation or transmission company, or refusing to approve a suspending bond, or requiring additional security thereon or an increase thereof, as hereinafter provided for, an appeal (subject to such reasonable limitations as to time, regulations as to procedure and provision as to cost, as may be prescribed by law) may be taken by the corporation whose rates, charges or classifications of traffic, schedule, facilities, conveniences, or service, are affected, or by any person deeming himself aggrieved by such action or (if allowed by law) by the state."

¶2 This appeal does not come within the terms of the foregoing, and the same is dismissed.

¶3 All the Justices concur.