Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

BUCHANAN, APPELLANT v. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF OHIO, APPELLEE.

Public Utilities Commission — Motor transportation companies — Application for abandonment of portion of route — Sixty-day order issued — Final and appealable — No statutory right to dismiss or withdraw — Application — Denial of motion to dismiss not unreasonable or unlawful.

Per Curiam.

There is no statute giving an applicant before the Public Utilities Commission a right to withdraw or dismiss his application. Although there is a statute authorizing dismissal of a Common Pleas Court action without prejudice, that statute permits such dismissal only "before final submission" of the action to the trier of the facts. Section 2323.05(A), Revised Code; Jacob Laub Baking Co. v. Middleton (1928), 118 Ohio St. 106.

The 60-day order of January 19 was a final appealable order. D.G. U. Truck Lines, Inc., v. Public Utilities Commission (1953), 158 Ohio St. 564.

Appellant offered no reason for granting his motion to dismiss his application, which motion was made after the final order of January 19.

The order of the commission in refusing to permit appellant to withdraw his application or dismiss it is neither unreasonable nor unlawful and is therefore affirmed.

Order affirmed.

TAFT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, MATTHIAS, O'NEILL, HERBERT and SCHNEIDER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BUCHANAN v. PUB. UTIL. COMM
(Mar 15, 1967)