discussed Cited "see" Southern California Freight Lines v. Public Utilities Commission Proc., § 1074 6 ; American Toll Bridge Co. v. Railroad Com. (1938), 12 Cal.2d 184, 190-193 [ 83 P.2d 1 ]; see Ashbury Truck Co. v. Railroad Com. (1931), 52 F.2d 263, 267 (affmd., 287 U.S. 570 [ 53 S.Ct. 94 , 77 L.Ed. 501 ]); San Diego etc. Ferry Co. v. Railroad Com. (1930), 210 Cal. 504, 508-513 [ 292 P. 640 ]; Southern California Edison Co. v. Railroad Com. (1936), 6 Cal.2d 737, 748-749, 755 [ 59 P.2d 808 ].) The evidence summarized above disposes also of petitioner’s contention that the certificate granted Sterling to operate between San Diego and San Francisco is “not supported by any …

discussed Cited "see, e.g." 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1284, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2200 United Parcel Service, Inc. v. California Public Utilities Commission Daniel Wm. Fessler Patricia M. Eckert See also Ashbury Truck Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of California, 52 F.2d 263, 268-69 (D.C.Cal.1931) (holding that motor carrier's motion to enjoin state railroad commission--an administrative precursor to the CPUC--was without equity where carrier failed to apply for rehearing or review by state supreme court), aff'd, 287 U.S. 570 , 53 S.Ct. 94 , 77 L.Ed. 501 (1932).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." United Parcel Service, Inc. v. California Public Utilities Commission See also Ashbury Truck Co. v. Railroad Comm’n of California, 52 F.2d 263, 268-69 (D.C.Cal.1931) (holding that motor carrier’s motion to enjoin state railroad commission — an administrative precursor to the CPUC — was without equity where carrier failed to apply for rehearing or review by state supreme court), affd, 287 U.S. 570 , 53 S.Ct. 94 , 77 L.Ed. 501 (1932).