Legal Opinion

Mill v. Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 23, 1982No. Appeal, No. 1027 C.D. 1981PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Blatt,

The petitioner, Rosemary Mill, seeks review of a decision of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) which adopted the order of an administrative law *599judge requiring her to make full payment of her monthly electric bills, plus $15 per month installments on past unpaid amounts. The order resulted after a hearing on her complaint that the Philadelphia Electric Company’s threats to terminate electrical service to her residence1 should be postponed under PUC regulations. 52 Pa. Code §§56.111-56.118. She alleges that a physician had certified that an occupant of her home suffered…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Barr v. Commonwealth, Department of Public WelfareCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. West Penn Power Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1980

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. West Penn Power Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Gas v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Jackson v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. West Penn Power Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Teltron, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

1 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