Copyright & Fair-use Agreement
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.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Information
Digital ID
Permalink
Details
More Info
Rights
Digital Provenance
Publisher
Transcription
COPT ^ BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF NEVADA T*r—>.* IN THE MATTER OF INCREASED RATES FILED BY : THE LAS VEGAS LAND AND WATER COMPANY : I. & S, Docket 52 Heard: May 28 & 29, 1931 Decided: August 28, 1931 APPEARANCES: For the Commission: I* F. Shaughnessy, Chairman George W. Malone, Commissioner For Las Vegas Land & Water Company: F. 1. MeNamee, Attorney Leo A. MeNamee, Attorney L. P* Drew, Bridge Engineer - L.A. & S.L* R.l* Co. L. J. Brungs, Chief Clerk " R. D. Perkins, Valuation Engineer » W. R. Bracken, Vice President - Las Vegas Land & Water Co. C. T. Connolley, Assistant Agent * For Protestants: Roger Foley, Attorney R. F. Minter C* J. Harvey A. F. Smith Fred J. George Frank M* Ryan O P I N I O N BY THE COMMISSION On March 7, 1931 the Las Vegas Land and Water Company filed with this Commission a schedule of rates to become effective June 1, 1931, for water service in the City of Las Vegas. Notice was given the public, as this schedule materially Increased the rates at present in effect. A protest was received and the new schedule of rates was suspended on May 18, 1931 for a period of thirty days, pending hearing, investigation and decision in the case. The case was heard before the Commission at Las Vegas on May 28 and 29, 1931* It having been found to be impossible to complete the investigation within the original suspension limit, the suspension was