Legal Opinion

Queens Borough Gas & Electric Co. v. Maltbie

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 1934PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLoughran, J.

The Special Term is not required (and indeed is without competency) to review the action of the Commission. Pending review by the Appellate Division, this court has power to grant a stay and to suspend the orders of the Commission. In *48the exercise of that jurisdiction the court must, in due respect for the presumptively valid action of the Commission and in conformity with standard judicial practice, search the record to determine whether the certiorari presents questions of such substance and importance as warrant a hearing before the orders of the Commission should become effective. If such…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. New York Edison Co. v. MaltbieNew York Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Kings County Lighting Co. v. MaltbieNew York Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re Upstate Telephone Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1935
  2. In re Long Island Lighting Co.New York Supreme Court · 1936
  3. New Rochelle Water Co. v. MaltbieNew York Supreme Court · 1936
  4. White Star Bus Line, Inc. v. District CourtSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API