Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Cantlay & Tanzola, Inc. v. Williams
Citations: 93 Ariz. 365; 380 P.2d 1019; 1963 Ariz. LEXIS 421Docket: No. 7819
Court: Arizona Supreme Court; April 25, 1963; Arizona; State Supreme Court
Petitioner Cantlay, Tanzola, Inc. seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the Arizona Corporation Commission to comply with a court order granting its application to operate as a contract carrier for Texaco, Inc. The Commission previously denied this application in 1959, a decision affirmed by the Superior Court. However, upon appeal, the court reversed the decision, deeming the Commission's refusal "unreasonable and arbitrary" and instructed the Commission to grant the permit. After the Supreme Court's decision, Cantlay applied for the permit again. While one commissioner signed an order to grant it, the other two commissioners refused, citing the original denial being more than two years prior, potential changed conditions, and the need for a new hearing. The court rejected these arguments, emphasizing that the prior ruling was specific to Cantlay's contract with Texaco and that no new circumstances warranted a different outcome. The court reiterated that the Commission had no authority to defy its ruling, underscoring the importance of judicial respect and the finality of court decisions. The court ordered the immediate issuance of a peremptory writ of mandamus to enforce compliance with its previous order. Chief Justice Bernstein and Justices Udall, Struckmeyer, Jennings, and Lockwood concurred with the decision.