SRC Holdings, LLC, Formerly Known as Williams Holdings, LLC, Doing Business as Williams Transport v. The Public Service Commission of West Virginia
21-0233
| W. Va. | Nov 2, 2021Background
- Petitioner Williams Transport challenged the Public Service Commission (PSC) approval allowing Ambassador Limousine and Taxi Service to acquire Classic Limousine Service, Inc.’s common motor carrier certificate.
- Classic’s certificate authorized limousine passenger service in nine West Virginia counties but most operations (≈80%) occurred in Raleigh County.
- Ambassador already held certificates authorizing service in four counties and sought to add Classic’s nine-county authority.
- Williams argued Classic’s certificate was geographically dormant outside Raleigh and operationally dormant as to certain passenger classes (e.g., railroad employees), and that transfer would create unfair competition.
- The PSC found Classic’s certificate was neither geographically nor operationally dormant and that Ambassador was able to provide the certificated service; the PSC approved the transfer.
- The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the PSC’s February 17, 2021 order.
Issues
| Issue | Williams' Argument | PSC / Ambassador's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a transfer requires a showing that the public convenience and necessity will be served | Transfer should be denied unless public convenience and necessity is shown | Transfer approval does not require that showing under Chabut | Transfer need not show public convenience and necessity; Chabut controls |
| Whether Classic’s certificate is geographically dormant | Classic mainly operated in Raleigh; minimal service elsewhere -> geographically dormant and nontransferable | Classic made trips into all certificated counties; rural context makes occasional trips "substantial operations" | Not geographically dormant; PSC’s factual finding affirmed |
| Whether Classic’s certificate is operationally dormant as to certain passenger classes (railroad employees) | Failure to transport railroad employees means operational dormancy for that passenger class | Certificate authorizes transport of passengers generally; no evidence Classic refused service to railroad workers | Not operationally dormant; certificate authorizes passenger transport broadly |
| Whether the transferee is fit to hold the certificate | Transfer would create devastating competition; implied challenge to Ambassador’s fitness | Ambassador has experience, equipment, finances, insurance; PSC found transferee capable | Transferee fitness not disputed on appeal; PSC’s approval stands (Ambassador fit) |
Key Cases Cited
- Chabut v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n of W. Va., 179 W. Va. 111, 365 S.E.2d 391 (W. Va. 1987) (transfer of motor-carrier certificate does not require showing public convenience and necessity)
- Solid Waste Servs. of W. Va. v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 188 W. Va. 117, 422 S.E.2d 839 (W. Va. 1992) (fitness inquiry for transferee: experience, equipment, insurance, finances)
- Cox v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n of W. Va., 188 W. Va. 736, 426 S.E.2d 528 (W. Va. 1992) (affirming denial of transfer where PSC found certificate dormant)
- Sierra Club v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n of W. Va., 241 W. Va. 600, 827 S.E.2d 224 (W. Va. 2019) (standard of appellate review for PSC orders)