Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

.p-j it 5 .:,i %i& ‘k..;:,. OFFICE OF THE ATt-ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN G-CMu(N A-*I*- . Ralkad Oonairsica di Tea8 Austia, Tbxba vhlohrbbda . ln put bS r0i al or rbid fitly- fwthw hoW.aq b 0 uith vhbt YO oca- l db o lr lo o rb th b the bp 1iaat, la ooopbmtlon vlth Y.& o r , thaAluR0 ?reight Lb a, Peprermt4a to the oom- mission thbt a settlau~t and Oomponall~wrmga- mint had been vorkbd out between them, aa the 00 244 iallroad 00ml881ai OS TOXLI, tag@ 2 hand, and-their opponents la the aforesaid litl- gCtian, am the other hand, vhoreb & aotlcm for rehowlng would 'be3ll.d addrue ei to the ordos denying the appllcrrtlon ln toto In whloh aa&& roti= and in aonnrotioa thorovlth there vould k a dlrolrlmer a8 to all part8 of the rpplloa- tloa to @lob thbF*WI8 mt. OppoUtlai or po- tomtj rrrdthat, ii the Oommlsslon VW vllling, the motlan for rehuriag, M to the tmooiitr8tsd pa&, oould be tad and, u to that put, a owtifloate oouf= d be 18ruedj and that than the Alamo t'reightLlnsr vould take over the Rllte, oporrted by WoCrary, and pay off oortda C.O.D. o la lmer h lovoh r b*eingr88ested lg8ln8t M o Cx wy and vhfoh renminrd unpaid and about vhioh 8evere oomplaints vece being lodged with thlr Comml8- 8lOll,--it being FODFe8~tad to thi8 oOmai88iCa that, in oameotion vlth thla motlan for rehem- lng and dfrolaiaeraad the porslble 188uaaor of & oortlfloateu to what.~a8 wprsamted to tm the mooateatod portion of the ~ro$osed route, there ~48 no protert or objeatlan from 8ayono and that the wttor had bera agreed upan a8 a oonrpro- mlao and rettlemrat. "Thfa motion 8ad dl8olrlmar Via fi'flul, OF8 r 02 the p wp o u8 0r th is o p inio n, y o uma yl88uw that 'it uas illed, vithln the tvatf day8 next iollovi.ngthe eatry of the order ot do&l61 roim- ing the houlng rub8equent to the oonoluaiarof the riorerald llti~tlm, "This motion md dlrb~lr Vu ret dovn for hea~irtgbefor. one of the Oomairrlaaer'rexam- lne~a, whereum it developed that Sunset Truok Lf.nes had not, fn faot, agreed to &tf 8wh grow- dure or, at least, olalmed that thby nov4, did agree to any auoh promdurs~ and they ontored their appearsnor aa protertbntr sad have rigor- 0~17 protested the prooedwe, both an the ilots end the IAV, claiming, among other thlngr, th8t 245 this CObiSSiOn &S zl0 PWrr, OF authority to hold a 8erle8.of rohoaringrjaad tbt, yhen the motion and di~olalmw vas ill.&, there vat, ln fUt a nd ltt& v, l nW b~plio~tlt'n vhioh V88 not in the fom OP in thr 8ub8t8aoo roqubod br the.St&Ute~ and that this 00m~f88lar &ad no pnnm to heas the uttor Or to deolde md di8908L 0r th0 Patter. ‘The oxamlnrr hwd the motion and dlrolti- or and r~oommonded to the Oomisaic~ that the motion be grmted and that l oertlfloat. be 18- Sued a8 to the SO-Odbd UBOCikt@Sted portian Of the rout&,--all over th8 prdtert of Suet Truak -08, ho. . gU@StiCUl “Did thr Com~lsrlon have the paver &id authority to hear aad dl8po8e of the so-oalled mtlcm and dlsolaimer and the paver and author- ity to deoide and d.lrpOse of the SW and to 188UO: the oUti?iOat~ M t0 the So-otiOd 7XaOcp1- taSt6d portlm; or vu the order of denial rob loving theheuingyhioh lf88 held 8Ub8OQXUlttO the Oozlo1USiOil of the lltl#tiQl finsJ. md OQI- olaulv.in ruoh h8bianthatnO turthergrocadur. oould be hold in this 08u8.t 'Uo&ld a oortifioate 188U.d ~WSU6IIt to th8 hewlq vhioh vu bid br tb18 0CdXEtSSi~ SUbor- quent to thr oaaolU8iaa of th. r?oPOraid liti@- tlai 0~6~'the pPOtb8t Of hYi8.t 'h'Wk Iat!iOS et al, b a mild oertlfiop or 8 voidU loah od if""* or l rol& blo Oertlfloat~t The U?ly hfStOl7 Of the appliOatiC+iio qW8tiOll 18 SOt out in th. O&Se Of bUm8Ot TX'UOk3&M&, fn0.r V'.Rall- 246 Railroad Oomml88lcm 0r tuu, tag0 0 road Coml8siaa lt al, 134 9. Y. (2d) 373. As YO under- &w the fbCt8, the FWilPUd 0~881CUl, l l PO&tit Of the abovo dOalSlo& held a further hoeing cm Bald appll- obtlon. Oa the Wlr:of uld hearfng, the Railroad ooze- ml881~ entePUl an ordor an ?ebrue.ry 20, 1910, denying the appuioatioa for b o- urrlw oairi0w. v0 fmther und8rrtaad that the lpplloant filed 8 motion for a rohurlnp cad also filed a disolaime~ as to I- 0r .the POUte8 u Sat Out in the appllO8tlOa. Xour letter S~t68 that YO ISSYbSSUIIK4 tbt the &Of&X& fOP P&&Ph!tg md the dlsolalmer Md filed Yitb the Wlrorrd CO~SSiCQ within tv63ity(20) day8 r0ii0thg th0 wry 0r th0 0-r denyl.nRthe lppllaation. 8ubrequently, it lpp8aPs that tha Railroaddonuisslaodld$rantamotloa for a re@arln~. UO 8?0 Of th0 Op~lOZktbt th0 !bitiord CO&&- .sian did ham the pww and authority, uuderthe f8ots Set out herein, to hear and bi&po&* or the motial for a rehurlng . This 18 ISSOd UpOn a PUh Of the oOmai138iOII giving iILtOPO8tOdpUti tVOnty (20) day8 aftOP th6 ~IU- try or aa order to fllo a motion for a rehearing. Ia the oa88 or Sproles Wotor holght Line, Ino. et 81 Y. Smith et al, 130 8. W. (ad) 1087 (vrlt mfwedj, the Court raid: ‘II Rval without the reoital above &obi in the order he~erfnvolved,the C0n~1lSai~ under it8 WI' PUNS giving LntereSt- Od pWtiO8 26 &yS 8ftOP tb Ont?y Of SUOh aZi order within vhioh to iii0 a eiotlonr0i rehwr- in& oould have rot8ined jUriSdiOti0Qo1.P the subjeot matter 0r its order to the oxtent 0r hearing suoh motion. m8 ?tiO Ofth6 C@2UUiS- 810~ $8 &et Out Ln SQIth P. IBid %%UOfSP b Storage O., Tax. Olr. App., 97 S. Y. (26) 991, 993, 8ad need not b8 ropeated here. Suoh 8 rule 18 JSM.if68tlynot wer8onablo, is hir to all parties ocsoorned, end affords the Com- niSS1On aa opportunityupon a prop6r shoving to COlT6Ot w b?PO?S OP riStSkO8 ltmPLLLyhrW made in ltr orl&Ul order . . . Rbllroad Co~alrrlaa of Tuu, twr 5 It iOiiW8 th8t if the Comm.iss1m had the authority to oonalder b-motion fo r l rehearing, the order entered on 201 1940,hS.nOt fitU%i SO a8 t0 pP6Ohd4 further z::m the Oamulsrlai. Wqdo not bell~evothat the quortlon of l purport- ldoonq)roml84 ha8 raybeuingoprtho QU48tiolrs hrnin in- rolvod . If,‘under the law ad faots, the appllc-mt was en- titled to have hi8 oe?tiiiO~to granted, no purported rpCreO- ment or 0 OdSO would inV'btid8t4 88id OePtlfl~tO. IIoltherYOT d an agreement or oompromlseb&veen the 8ppll- o8nt and other intmnst6d ~tI48~nlI&t4 a OertlflOat4 vhloh VU OthOl'V184 void: We am unable to dotermino whether or not the 0OUllli4810~had the authority cw 90veP to 188uO 8 oertlfl- oat6 b&Se& upw the applioatlan in QUOStiCSl. -the?, VI omnot determIne whether luoh oertlfloat6 would be voidable, void or valid. The M&Ye?& to tdl484 qU48tiCQlS dopend UpOn may faot lrsu19s vhloh we oan neither antlolpste nor detrr- mine. Lstej