Legal Opinion
In re New Jersey Bell Telephone Co.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided June 13, 1996PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
KESTIN, J.A.D.
In the Telecommunications Act of 1992 (the Act), N.J.S.A. 48:2-21.16 to -21.21, the Legislature found and declared, inter alia, that(1) In a competitive marketplace, traditional utility regulation is not necessary to protect the public interest and that competition will promote efficiency, reduce regulatory delay, and foster productivity and innovation.
* *(5) It is in the public interest to relieve interexchange telecommunications carriers 1 from traditional utility regulation.
[N.J.S.A. 48:2-21.16b (footnote added).]
*83Accordingly, the…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Permian Basin Area Rate CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Federal Communications Commission v. National Citizens Committee for BroadcastingSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1983
- City of Knoxville v. Knoxville Water Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Pse&g Co.'s Rate UnbundlingNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2000
- In Re Reg. of Oper. Serv. ProvidersNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2001
- In re Public Service Electric & Gas Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1997
- In Re Bell Atlantic New Jersey, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2001
- Penpac v. Passaic County UtilitiesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2004
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.