Legal Opinion
Barasch v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided May 30, 1990No. 2268, 2270, 2324 and 2371 C.D. 1989PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on a petition for review of the November 9, 1989 order entered by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (Commission) which rejected the Recommended Decision of Administrative Law Judge Michael Schnierle (ALJ) and approved the use of a customer service reintroduced by Bell of Pennsylvania (Bell)1 identified as Caller*ID. This service would permit customers to identify the telephone number from which a call is being made to the customer and is to be offered with limited blocking for private, nonprofit, tax-exempt domestic violence…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Burton v. Wilmington Parking AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Moose Lodge No. 107 v. IrvisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Blystone v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- National Collegiate Athletic Assn. v. TarkanianSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. AT&T Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2003
- TIMES PUB. CO., INC. v. MichelCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Barasch v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- PG Publishing Co. v. County of WashingtonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- United Telephone Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.