Vincze

Vincze v. Interstate Commerce Commission

Good Law
267 F.2d 577
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 17, 1959No. 16327California599 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The only question before this Court is whether or not there is sufficient evidence in the record to sustain the district court’s order enjoining the defendants from engaging in common or contract carriage in interstate commerce without a certificate or permit as required by 49 U.S.C.A. §§ 306 (a) and 309(a). F.R.Civ.P. 52(a), 28 U.S.C.A.

The record discloses sufficient evidence to justify the conclusion that the defendants, acting in concert, are a single operating company engaged in interstate commerce in.violation of §§ 306(a) and 309(a). The evidence briefly stated is as follows: The individual defendant, Alexander L. Vincze, was one of the' original incorporators of both corporate defendants, Pioneer Truck Rentals (hereafter called “Pioneer”), and Drivers Service (hereafter called “Drivers”). He held 98% of the stock of each of these corporations until six months subsequent to the commencement of this action. At. that time Mr. Vincze, while still retaining his 98% of the stock of Pioneer, transferred his stock interest in Drivers to Grant Beeney, a former Pioneer employee. Mr. Beeney, after assigning the Drivers stock to Lome Pratt, also a former Pioneer employee, is once…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.