Legal Opinion

Behrend v. Bell Telephone Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 12, 1978No. 472, 473 and 492PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JACOBS, President Judge:

This case is before us on remand from the Supreme Court 1 to decide whether the limitation of damages provision of Bell’s tariff is valid under Article III, Section 18 of the Pennsylvania Constitution:

“The General Assembly may enact [workmen’s compensation laws] . . but in no other cases shall the General Assembly limit the amount to be recovered . for injuries to persons or property . . ..” (Emphasis added.)

After a studied consideration of the able arguments of both parties, we conclude that Bell’s tariff is not violative of the above-quoted constitutional provision.

We…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Singer v. SheppardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Feingold v. Bell of PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Behrend v. Bell Telephone Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. Commonwealth v. HarmonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Bash v. Bell Telephone Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Valhal Corp. v. Sullivan Associates, Inc., Architects, Planners, EngineersCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
  3. Pinnacle Computer Services, Inc. v. Ameritech Publishing, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1994
  4. Danisco Ingredients USA, Inc. v. Kansas City Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1999
  5. Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. Auchan USA, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1999

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API