COMPLAINT OF MORSE CAB, ET AL
v.
CENTRAL CAB CO.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Public Service Commission dismissed a complaint by Morse Cab and other taxi companies challenging Central Cab Company's advertising and implementation of a $7 flat rate from Miami Beach to Miami International Airport. The Commission found that flat rates are permissible for for-hire transportation and that the complainants failed to demonstrate improper rate-setting.
The Commission affirmed the examiner's decision dismissing the complaint, finding that flat rates (whether distance-based or time-based) are permitted for taxicab service and that complainants failed to demonstrate that defendant was improperly charging such rates. The Commission determined that once taxicab service extends beyond city jurisdiction, it becomes 'for-hire' transportation subject to negotiation rather than common carriage regulation.
[1] Rates charged by for-hire permit carriers are subject to negotiation between parties and are not regulated.
[2] Meter or flat rates are permitted for taxicabs providing transportation subject to commission jurisdiction.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Pursuant to §323.08, F.S., only rates of motor carriers 'holding a certificate ... for common carriage' are regulated. Thus, rates charged by any for hire permit carrier are subject to negotiation between the parties.”
Establishes the legal basis for why flat rates are permissible for for-hire transportation and not subject to Commission regulation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceComplainants filed a letter on September 26, 1972, alleging that Central Cab Company was advertising and instituting a flat rate of $6 (later establis…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
The entire record herein has been reviewed by the commission. After due consideration, the commission now enters its order in this cause.
By letter dated September 26, 1972, complainants’ attorney charged Central Cab Company with advertising and instituting a flat rate from Miami Beach to the Miami International Airport.
A hearing was held on the complaint in Miami on February 26, 1973. At the hearing the letters of complaint and reply were stipulated to as being all the facts in the case, except that the flat rate from Miami Beach to the airport was $7 rather than $6.
As a result of the evidence received at the hearing, the examiner reasoned —
“Pursuant to §323.08, F.S., only rates of motor carriers ‘holding a certificate ... for common carriage’ are regulated. Thus, rates charged by any for hire permit carrier are subject to negotiation between the parties. Meter or flat rates (either distance or time) are permitted to taxicabs providing transportation which is subject to our jurisdiction. Although taxicab service within the city may meet the test of ‘on call’ common carriage, as soon as that same taxi moves beyond the city’s jurisdiction the transportation must become ‘for hire,’ that is, neither common nor contract and in single, casual and non-recurring trips [§323.01 (9), F.S.]. Thus, this complaint should be dismissed.”
From the foregoing, the examiner concluded that the complainants failed to show that the defendant is improperly charging flat rates.
*61In addition, the examiner stated that the defendant appeared to be soliciting movements under its master taxi authority in violation of this commission’s rules. However, no concrete evidence appeared in the record to support this claim.
Accordingly, this commission finds that the examiner’s findings and conclusions should be adopted and the above complaint dismissed.
It is therefore ordered that the complaint of Morse Cab, Miami Beach Yellow Cab and North Beach Yellow Cab Companies vs. Mercury Cab Association, d/b/a Central Taxi Service, Inc., be and the same is hereby dismissed.
By order of Chairman WILLIAM H. BEVIS, Commissioner WILLIAM T. MAYO and Commissioner PAULA F. HAWKINS, as and constituting the Florida Public Service Commission, this 28th day of June, 1973.
William B. DeMilly Administrative Secretary