Legal Opinion
Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided February 4, 1977No. 206 C.D. 1976PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge Wilkinson,
TMs is a declaratory judgment action, under the Act of June 18, 192:3, P.L. 840, as amended, 12 P.S. §§831-853, seeking to determine whether Act 142,1 re*464quiring flag protection be provided against trains occupying the same track, is valid and constitutional.
While, the history of Act 142 is long and entwined, we will attempt to be brief.2 Act 142 was enacted several months after the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) decided to reinstate Rule 16,3 a rule which is substantially similar to Act 142. Contemporaneously, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- California v. ZookSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. UseryCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. ColemanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Monongahela Connecting Railroad v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- State ex rel. Utilities Commission v. Seaboard Coast Line RailroadCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Union Pacific Railroad v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1978