Legal Opinion
D & H Corp. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided August 4, 1992No. 2495 C.D. 1991PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NARICK, Senior Judge.
In this case of first impression, this Court must determine whether the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) has the authority to order D & H Corporation (D & H) to pay 50% of future maintenance costs of a highway bridge which *510crosses over certain of D & H’s rail lines in Luzerne County (crossing).
On May 9, 1984, the Department of Transportation (DOT) filed a petition with the PUC, seeking approval for the reconstruction of a crossing, carrying Pennsylvania Legislative Route 5 over railroad tracks owned by D & H and Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail). After a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- FMC Corp. v. HollidaySupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Mazur v. Merck & Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1990
- Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Kolbeck v. General Motors Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1989
- United States v. City of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Greene Township Board of Supervisors v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Bell Atlantic-Pennsylvania, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- East Lampeter Township v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997