# Public Service Interstate Transportation Co. v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

> Supreme Court of New Jersey · September 18, 1942 · 129 N.J.L. 94

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3560307

## Case

- **Full name:** Public Service Interstate Transportation Company, Prosecutor-Respondent, v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners (Appellant), Et Al., Defendants
- **Court:** Supreme Court of New Jersey
- **Decided:** September 18, 1942
- **Citations:** 129 N.J.L. 94; 28 A.2d 199; 1942 N.J. LEXIS 284
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Parker
- **Judges:** Parker
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3560307

## Opinion text

The opinion of the court was delivered by'
Parker, J.
This appeal presents the anomalous situation of a special statutory tribunal which has rendered a judicial decision pursuant to powers conferred on it by statute undertaking to prosecute an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court on
certiorari,
holding that such decision was erroneous.
The facts sufficiently appear in the
per curiam
opinion of the Supreme Court,
ubi supra.
The question of law was whether the “revocation” of a bus line permit by the Borough of Maywood was invalid because it had not been approved by the Board, as provided by statute.
R. S.
48:4-7. The Board held that it was valid, distinguishing the case of
Hudson County Bus Owners’ Association
v.
Board,
6
N. J. Mis. R.
1070; 143
Atl. Rep.
755 . The Supreme Court said that the decision of the Board was erroneous in law, and ordered it set aside. Only the Board has appealed. The successful
*95
party below is before us as respondent, but Garden State Lines, its opponent below, has not appealed or filed any brief, and so as has just been said, the Board itself is the only appellant. We are clear that it has no status as such. It is in no sense a party whose interests are adversely affected, but obviously a subordinate statutory tribunal which made a legal decision reviewable by
certiorari
like those of other special statutory tribunals.
The appeal will be dismissed.
For dismissal
—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Parker, Bodine, Perskie, Porter, Colie, Dear, Wells, Rafferty, Hague, Thompson, JJ. 12.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3560307. Public record. Not legal advice.