Case Information
*1 . 520 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
QDULDCN&Ml --
-h Texss
duetit,
ctolltlcJs3ll$
Of yow 1efter nt, rpliah let- of JtaPisc?iotion aPisos the cowlpany did not to the Gam~Loeion from ox%mlalm, effectJIve but inete& attwked 0 0Ptlbsnoe ana tam ga8 utility statutes by an appeal to the Die- CouPt in wh8PtoIl county, where the
trlct OPLWNUWJ was 8upePsd3d aad litigot%On
initiated.
*ThcJ orainanao and the statutes WBPe finally hol(l to be vSr3.d and the CWPBW
filed its appeal to the Oommbdon on @@et s, iff40, after ntmrlg a yew had elapsed
fP0~ opP‘3ctiro data of! the tx-clime.
Uonor3blo ken A. Sxzith
tionorablo Jerry Stiler - pa@ 2
*Tuo questions 3re lmsect ~fiicb 8ffeot the juriedictist of the Comrzl.ssion -
*First: iias th3 Cowpmy lost its fight or 3IIpaal to the R3ilro3d comzission 38 I"o- vid& by Artlcl,o @OOS, R. 6., 1926, 3s wnded?
"&uiwGrs tZi tLk3s+ two qu"ations will be appax%3fezl." drtiole 6o68 of .&he &W&Sod ciV% %afU?ie6 &S 08
followst
*Whm 3 aity F;Gvernmct Las crdepsd aaj etxietifii r3te roiluced, the gas utility Pfieot- ed by such order my 3pw31 tc the Co~&~sj.ou by filing aitb it (iu such torr~ snd connitifms a0 th0 Coam;tssion ray direct, a jmtition and bond to revielp the doaision, regulation, orbi- n3nc0, or ord0r of the city, ttxm or nuaioipal- ity . Upou suoh appeal being taken tbo C&e- s&on shall set a holu'i?&$ and ~oay m&e su&i OP- de or dooiulon iri regard to the Biatter iwolt- Bd therein ES St way deem Just axxl raasonoble.
The Cocgdeeion shall hear such appeal de nwo.
Yheuever any 3.0~31 distributing com;$mny or oon- awn, obese ratbe hova beon fixed by any mniel- pal gwornmcnt, des.Iroe a cI13k~e of any of its rates, pentale or chcrFes, it shell lilalie its application to the mmxcip31 government wbme I such utility is locat& an4 such municipal~
gwomummt shall dc&3rndnc said agpliootion sir,M.~. sixty &aye aftor gr3eentrrtion unleee th3 determination thereof may be longer defer- red by 3@%ment. If the mu&ci~l gwerument shouZd reject such ap@.,llcation or Pail or re- fuse to act on it rvith5.n s3iil sixty days. then +&ha utility gay npwal tx the Com~&~ion as hersfn providti - Uui sa.td Comiesion +&all dotwdne the utters involved in any such
appeal rtithin sixty Lays aftar tiw3 filing: by such utility of such appeal psitb ss.ld Comnde- sion cm such furtkior tim? as such utility shall in vrifine, 3gmo to, but the rates fixed by such Epmlci~l gwernnont shall r9ma5.n in full form and of'feat until ordered changed by CQnurdsi~on.*
It will be sem the statute preeoribea no time
WithiR Which tit0 AiFp0Ckl i;aY b0 ta22n to the Comdesion. Ordinarily, this tl.rz.Q 913mmt is ~mW.cloc~ in cOnnectiOn with the authority Fpqr Lhz a>pcill.
hn appeal 08 su& is not ossmtial to duo ~~OQQBQ, if the or&w or decision itself has beon mclc or rendorti in a yrweml.tng moating th%Ly r"umlar2ont.31 requirement of the Ccnstitution. Th0 cxp3ss :yantitrg CP tlit3 ri&t to appeal, howover, cOncludvcly ovidcnooo the lagislative intent that 5uol: right 5hould *S&SC, so that oc rust construe the stat- ute with rofp3ct to th2 t&w within tvhtch the right to ap- p6al mitt be exorcised.
Tim purpose 0P all litigation is, of course, to
put an mrl to contmversy. Ln turn, it is the plrposo of every appeal (wharo on9 fe r;omittfkl) a.m.l eepeeially of the titw ototmtt with respect to the exemisking of sue appeal, LB to lout au en& to tho litigofion. That aoaounte for t&e al&mot universal rule that a tins within which the appeal is to be talcon or pert'eutcd is atat3d in the statute @ruthorlzing tho appeal.
%hLs statute tither raves the right of appeal to ths tliseotisfied utility without 'any limit wbateower ne to th3 tim wit&-din whiti the right met bo exeroieti, or it neeessarilv i~pl~os s litit as to suloh tim* It is Lncon- caivable &at the EOg-&latUX% riaant to Ctpnf'er thQ ri t of ;rgpol dthout w lititation whatsoever as to tho t f% within which such appeal shoulr2 bs taken. This idoe is inconsistent with the conooytion QTP mped.itian of the cdl tc thy controversy, ‘and, momover, would result in a chaotic unocrttintg never contcsglated by the Lo&:ielatura.
zt'c nre of tho opinion there should be road into
th3 stotUt3 ~5 a 2IwmBiWy iEIpliCatiG2? thS PeqUiPelrrent that an app3al fro& the ordinattoe of tha city to the Corn-- rission should be talan within a masonable time after the rigbt of appal lie& aocrut3ti~
k"uat is t&at ~rwaonable tits+ -- whether qua&ion be ona of fnct or of law -- moasearily Begmls upm tIx circumstances OL 0 tlm pmticular f%mt situst5.on.
Xn 5pooial procoedi.a~;s, like the faeeont* where
&It WiQ33ill i6 RUthOZd.Z0i!* the rattar of tine is not neces- swLfy Set,or&ne& by the gaumd ru%e of time with respect *4 honorable Lou A. Smith
honorable Jerry Sa%ler - paw4
to appeals, but 0x1 the oontrary, the spsaial statute will aontrol. See 4 C. J. Sec. p. 889, ~431,rhere the question is disouoae%. At all events we are of the opixioxthatxhere the longest time providedby the general law for appeal8 in ordinary suits has elapsed, it will tmrk the expiration of the rsason- able t&e which the special statute has, aacordiag to our conetruotion, pwvl%o% in the lxresent ease.
In 4 C. J. Sea. p. 893 it is sai%k "of courtto, despite the existence of sp00ial p~~isiOns mpldng the time for action dependent up0n any of the s&tore roferre% to, if no appeal or pr043ae%ing for review is taken until aftor tho ex- piration af the longest period allowable, whether the nature Of the aotion or pro- oettding or of the di8position na%e by the acntrt below, la any aape& in which it xd.ght be vlexe%, suGh action is there- atter barred rithout any need for inquiry or %eoision as to suah special matter8.s So that, if the s&ter of reasonable time be tentttd by aualogJ to the longest period for which any statute expressly given time to appeal, the nut- for has been forecrlose%, for the dslay shown fn thla casa exoee%s any tine known to the law for an appeal, or even a writ of error treating that proaee%ing itself as an appeal.
WQ therefore answer your first question in the affiraattve.
8ime the ordinau00 rats was not affeated by the abortive effort ts enjoin its enforComsnt, an% einoe there has been no other step taken, whlah could result in vacatiue; or suspemling It, it fol-
524 : Eenorable Len A. Bndth,
Eonerable Jerry Sadler - page 8
lows that your second question should likewise be answer- ed 3.n the aff5rniative.
Our conclusions have support in the court de- tiisioxi~ of this Stateuponanalogous situations uonstru- ing appeals frm boards of aohool trustees, and the State of Public Instructions Superintendent
*But, while the Aot doea not expressly fix axq time within whioh the appeal shall
be prosecute&, the public interest deumnda
that it shall be talten without uxmeeus~
delay, and fe are satisfied from the very euah wau the intenf
nature of the 0-e that of the Le slatwe.* - htIvulese ve. JhltohQF eon (Tex. 38 8. w* 1120. $1
*A reasonable tims without unueoeseary delay, te the rule in such oaa66.* -- Watkins 63 8. W. 922, writ of error dls- VS. mff, mbm3d uritten oplnlon 64 8. 1. 882.
*In the abrrenoe of any suoh rule (pre- mlgateiiby the Otate Superlntetienf) the
sole Inquiry then 1st What la a ressonable time under al1ooncUtlons surrounding
ins&ant oaee?* - Trustees of Chilioothe
Ind. S&o01 Diet. vu. DwXney, US 8+ Wr
1007. !Shirty days was held to be a reaaon- able time in that oabe.
*It is true the law does not presotibe +,hc lmgth of time in which an appeal from
the action of a Board of l'rueteoe Can be
taken, but the rule6 of equity d0 doe?and
that such dW.gonoe must b0 ueod as will prevent innocent parties from bein(r, injured.a
-- Los Aqeles iloight.8 IIIL¶. School Met. TIJ* Chestnut, 287 B. W. S92. Zn that Qase tW0
weeke was held to ham been 0 roaeonsble
ti%#.
b
S25 i.
B-lebonA.Sudtb
Bowrable Jerry failer - page 6
We trust thic will be a msffioienf aaffer to your inquirsea.