Legal Opinion · Dissent

D. F. Bast, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 21, 1958No. Appeals, Nos. 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 239Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Rhodes, P. J.:

I am obliged to file this dissent to the majority opinion notwithstanding its alluring appeal.

The grant of additional authority to the applicant on this record was, in my opinion, a manifest abuse of discretion on the part of the commission; and it is an abuse of judicial authority to affirm the commission’s order. It reAvards an applicant which has repeatedly and willfully violated the laAV, and Avhich in fact openly defies any laAvful regulation.

This Court should not give its approval to the grant of additional benefits to one so obviously unfit to have…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Cage v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  2. Lancaster Transportation Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Arrow Carrier Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Hubert v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  5. Byham v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1949

2 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