Legal Opinion
Rohrbaugh v. Pennsylvania PUC
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided March 26, 1999PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CASTILLE, Justice.
The issue on appeal is whether a utility company violates its duty to provide reasonable and adequate service as required by Section 1501 of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S. § 1501, where extensive damage is caused to a rental property after the utility company disconnects electric service for the property at a tenant/ ratepayer’s request without first notifying the landlord of the disconnection, where the landlord is not the ratepayer for the electric service. Because we find that a utility company does not violate its statutory duties in such a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Slawek v. BD. OF MED. ED. & LICENSURESupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Elkin v. Bell Tel. Co. of PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Girard School District v. PittengerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
3Cited by36 opinions
- Winslow-Quattlebaum v. Maryland Insurance GroupSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Tire Jockey Service, Inc. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Popowsky v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Elite Industries, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Slippery Rock Area School District v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.