Summary

Portrait of John Hessin Clarke John Hessin Clarke City of Houston v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company…

In its cross-appeal the Company assigns as error, the holding of the District Court that the merger ordinance of 1915 obliges the Company to accept the cost of its physical plant as the basis for rate-making, instead of the usual basis, the value, at the time of the inquiry, of the property used and useful in operating the plant.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Hessin Clarke John Hessin Clarke City of Houston v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company…

From the American Telegraph & Telephone Company the Company leases its instruments and secures their maintenance and renewal and from the Western Electric Company it obtains the greater part of its equipment and supplies used in operating its local exchange. It is contended by the City that no fair disclosure was made of the profits made by the furnishing companies on the instruments and on the material and supplies so furnished, and that, for this unique reason, the Company should not be heard in a court of equity and the case should be dismissed.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Hessin Clarke John Hessin Clarke City of Houston v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company…

Equity rule No. 75 (33 Sup. Ct. xl) provides that evidence to be included in the record shall not be set forth in full but shall be stated in a simple and condensed form, and rule 21 of this court (32 Sup. Ct. x) provides that briefs of the argument shall be filed in each case, with references to the pages of the record and the authorities relied upon in support of each point.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature