Legal Opinion

Reed v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 11, 1953No. Appeals, Nos. 157, 159 and 160PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rhodes, P. J.,

These appeals are from interim orders of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission denying petitions of certain property owners to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction the applications of the Duquesne Light Company for Commission approval of the exercise of the power of eminent domain under the Act of May 21, 1921, P. L. 1057, §1, 15 PS §1182.

On February 28, 1953, the Duquesne Light Company filed similar applications with the Commission for approval of the exercise of the power of eminent domain in its construction of a transmission line across the properties owned by…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sayre Land Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Pittsburgh Railways Co. v. P. S. C.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  3. Dickel v. Bucks-Falls Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  4. Whitaker Borough v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  5. Westside Electric Street Railway Co. v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Redding v. Atlantic City Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  2. Stellwagon v. PyleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  3. Blythe Township Municipal Authority v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  4. White Oak Borough Authority v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  5. Duquesne Light Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1978

10 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