UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.
Digital Provenance
Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room
Publisher
University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries
Transcription
m happened in the future. It is noted on page It6 of the Petition, "The Hope case does not change the constitutions or statutes of the individual Stated and the State Commissions are free to follow the mandates of their own State constitutions and statutes." To this we agree but this Commission would be in a rather embarrassing position if it went against the edict of the United States Supreme Court as expressed in the Hope case and then found that the Water Company or any other company appealed through the courts to the United States Supreme Court for a decision* The Commission in its Opinion and Order of August 2h? 195>1 took due consideration of all relevant facts in the record of the Las Vegas Land and Water Company in granting the applicant an increase in water rates. The petition of the Las Vegas Land and Water Company for reconsideration of the Opinion and Order under I & S Docket No, 127, or a rehearing in X & S Docket No, 127 should be denied. An appropriate order will be entered, - 5 -
