Medic-Call, Inc. v. Public Service Commission
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
ELLETT, Justice.
This case is before us on a writ of certi-orari based upon stipulated facts, and the only question to be resolved is whether or not the defendants have jurisdiction over the service rendered by plaintiffs. The defendants asserted authority pursuant to Section 54-2-1(30), U.C.A.1953, as amended (Replacement Volume 6, 1969, Pocket Supplement) which insofar as material reads:
The term "public utility” includes every * * * telephone corporation, * * where the service is performed for * * the public generally * * *. And whenever any * * * telephone corporation * * * performs a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Public Utilities Commission v. NelsonUtah Supreme Court · 1925
- Garkane Power Co., Inc. v. Public Service Comm.Utah Supreme Court · 1940
- San Miguel Power Ass'n v. Public Service CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1956
3Cited by5 opinions
- Williams v. Public Service Com'n of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1988
- Cottonwood Mall Shopping Center, Inc. v. Utah Power & Light Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1971
- Williams v. PUBLIC SERVICE COM'N OF UTAHUtah Supreme Court · 1986
- Cottonwood Mall Shopping Center, Inc., a Utah Corporation, and v. Utah Power & Light Company, a Maine Corporation, and Utah Power & Light Company, a Maine Corporation, Third-Party and v. Sidney M. Horman, Veoma H. Horman, Horman Development Company and Horman Investment Company, Third-Party AndCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Holmgren v. Utah-Idaho Sugar Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1978