Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. Everett
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
WILNER, Judge.
There are two basic questions presented to us in this appeal: When a public utility expresses an intention to terminate service to a customer and the customer complains to the Public Service Commission, in a proceeding before the Commission emanating from the complaint, (1) does the utility have the burden of showing that the proposed termination is justified or does the customer have the burden of showing that it is unjustified, and’ (2) where the proposed termination is purportedly based on COMAR 20.31.02.04 (Fraudulent Use), what standard of proof is required? We need answer…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Bernstein v. Real Estate CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
- Telephone News System, Inc. v. Illinois Bell Telephone Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1963
- Poole v. Paris Mountain Water Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1908
- Fay, U. S. Atty. v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
- Andrews v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1949
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Everett v. Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
- Grasslands Plantation, Inc. v. Frizz-King Enterprises, LLCCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2009
- Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. HendricksCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997