Legal Opinion
At & T v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided August 24, 1999PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SAYLOR, Justice.
At issue in these consolidated appeals is the manner in which the Public Utility Commission allocates costs of alterations to rail-highway crossings between a transportation public utility and affected parties.
The cases arise from the relocation of telecommunications facilities of Appellees AT & T and Sprint Communications Company L.P. (“Sprint”), consisting of fiber optic cables and associated equipment, due to alterations to three rail-highway crossings in the City of Scranton, as well as to a 3,600-foot railroad tunnel running beneath a state highway and a Nicholson…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Slawek v. BD. OF MED. ED. & LICENSURESupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Rohrbaugh v. Pennsylvania PUCSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- City of Philadelphia v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Greene Township Board of Supervisors v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Philadelphia v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Mercury Trucking, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- PECO Energy Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Arippa v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Wheeling & Lake Erie Railway Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.