Barasch v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BARRY, Judge.
The Office of Consumer Advocate (Consumer Advocate) has petitioned this Court to review orders of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) granting general rate increases to three water utilities. The Consumer Advocate submits that the procedural treatment of these three water rate cases before the PUC constituted violations of due process as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and provisions of the law of this Commonwealth delegating to the PUC administrative authority to consider the general rate increases sought by utilities. We find that the procedural…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sweener v. First Baptist Church of EmporiumSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Wall v. WallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Vanmetre v. UNEMP. COMP. BD. OF REV.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Joseph Horne Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
3Cited by1 opinion
- Schellhammer v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993