Legal Opinion

Popowsky v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 21, 2011No. 715 C.D. 2010PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

Judge BROBSON.

The Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA) petitions for review of an order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC), dated April 15, 2010. The PUC authorized Newtown Artesian Water Company (NAWC) to supplement its tariff for water service with an automatic rate adjustment mechanism to recover increases in purchased water expense, referred to as a “Purchased Water Adjustment Clause” (PWAC). The principal issue in this case is whether the PUC has authority under Section 1307(a) of the Public Utility Code (Code), 66 Pa.C.S. § 1307(a), to allow NAWC to implement the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Blumenschein v. Pittsburgh Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  2. Slawek v. BD. OF MED. ED. & LICENSURESupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Popowsky v. Pennsylvania Public UtilitySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  4. Barasch v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Pennsylvania Industrial Energy Coalition v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. McCloskey v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  2. Tanya J. McCloskey, Acting Consumer Advocate v. PA PUCCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API