City of Philadelphia v. Public Service Commission
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Linn, J.,
The city and the intervening appellants are in such close accord in gathering from the evidence á rate-base sufficient to sustain the challenged rates, that but little need be said in recording our unanimous conclusion that this appeal should be dismissed.
The city complained that a proposed rate-increase was unreasonable and asked the commission to prescribe what the company might charge. The commission ordered the company to put into effect for a trial-period of six months, “a seven cent cash fare and a six and one-quarter cent rate of fare where coupon tickets in blocks…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Leiper v. Baltimore & Philadelphia RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Citizens Passenger Railway Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- City of Scranton v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- New Street Bridge Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Philadelphia v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- City of Philadelphia v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Sambor v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1928
- Harmony Electric Co. v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co. Rate Case, Pennsylvania Department of Justice1924
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.