Legal Opinion

Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 4, 1995PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) petitions for review of an order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) directing rehabilitation of a bridge over railroad tracks and allocating costs. Conrail asserts that, when the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) owns property carrying its tracks beneath a highway but is exempt under a federal statute from the imposition of costs to maintain the crossing, Amtrak’s share of costs should be ascertained by the PUC and then be allocated to governmental entities benefitting from the passenger rail service.

A small,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pocono Water Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. County of Chester v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. D & H Corp. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. City of Philadelphia v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  3. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2003
  5. Peco Energy Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

3 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