A. It is hereby declared unlawful for any person to transport household goods in intrastate commerce without a valid certificate issued by the Corporation Commission. B. Motor carriers engaged in intercorporate hauling must obtain a certificate in the motor carrier’s name. C. Applicants for intrastate authority to transport household goods shall file an application as required by this act and as prescribed by the Commission. A household goods certificate shall be issued to the applicant upon completion of all requirements. D. The Commission may consider any written protests or written complaints filed prior to granting or renewing a household goods certificate. If the Commission elects not to grant or renew a household goods certificate, the application shall be set for public hearing in accordance with Commission rules. E. Household goods certificates may not be assigned or transferred.
F. The Commission shall exercise any additional power that may from time to time be conferred upon the state by any Act of Congress. G. The Commission shall adopt rules prescribing the manner and form in which motor carriers shall apply for a household goods certificate. Added by Laws 1929, c. 253, p. 353, § 6. Amended by Laws 1965, c. 183, § 2; Laws 1968, c. 190, § 6, eff. Sept. 30, 1968; Laws 1995, c. 143, § 18, eff. Nov. 1, 1995; Laws 2009, c. 183, § 5, eff. Nov. 1, 2009.
Notes of Decisions
Oklahoma Transp. Co. v. Claiborn, 434 P.2d 299 (Okla. 1967).
“Under Title 47 O.S.1961, § 166, it would have been unlawful for defendant to furnish its services within the State without having obtained from the Corporation .”
Banning Transp., Inc. v. Vansickle, 527 P.2d 586 (Okla. 1974).
“47 O.S.1971, § 166, provides that motor carrier’s permits or certificates shall not be assigned or transferred without Commission’s approval and the transfer shall not be authorized “ * * * where it appears that reasonable continuous service under the authority which is sought…”
Oklahoma Transp. Co. v. Corp. Comm'n, 552 P.2d 401 (Okla. 1976).
“OT points to the presumption as to its service and Jordan’s burden of proof, both found at 47 O.S.1971, § 166, reading in part: “* * * it will be presumed, in the absence of competent evidence to the contrary, that intrastate common carriers operating under existing certificates…”
United Parcel Serv., Inc. v. Corp. Comm'n of Oklahoma, 600 P.2d 864 (Okla. Civ. App. 1979).
· cites it 2× “UPS, as an applicant for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity as a common carrier by motor vehicle over irregular routes, is confronted with the rigid, specific requirements of Title 47 O.S.1971, § 166, which provides in part as follows: It is hereby declared…”
W. Motor Freight, Inc. v. State, 534 P.2d 926 (Okla. 1975).
· cites it 2× “47 O.S.1971 § 166, piovides in part: “In order for the public and all interested parties to receive proper notice, in addition to any notice the Commission may prescribe, the Commission shall circulate, on its own docket form, notice of all applications for * * * certificates *…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.