Legal Opinion

Westerhoff Bros. Co. v. Ephrata Boro

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 10, 1925No. Appeal, 155PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Sadler,

The Borough of Ephrata became the owner, in 1900, of an electric light plant, and thereafter furnished current for power and light to those located within its limits. It supplied a 220-volt current for the former purpose, and one-half this amount for the latter. In 1920, an ordinance was passed, amended by resolution the year following, fixing its charges at four cents per kilowatt hour for the one class of .service, and ten cents for the other, and requiring that all be metered. Westerhoff Bros. Co., plaintiff, had operated a silk mill in the town since 1897,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Barnes Laundry Co. v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  2. Duquesne Light Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  3. Baily v. Fayette Gas-Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
  4. Graver v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
  5. Mercur v. Media Electric Light, Heat & Power Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Reigle v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  2. Kiefer v. City of Idaho FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Philadelphia Electric Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API