Legal Opinion
Kaplan v. Cablevision of PA, Inc.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided February 5, 1996No. 04200PublishedCited by 84 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HUDOCK Judge:
If a cable company fails to voluntarily rebate fees for periods of cable interruption, does this constitute an unfair or deceptive practice under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL), 73 P.S. section 201-1 et seq., when the cable subscription agreement does not expressly obligate the cable company to provide continuous, uninterrupted service? We find that it does not and hence affirm the trial court’s November 2, 1994 order which granted Cablevision of PA, Inc.’s and Suburban Cable TV Co., Inc.’s preliminary objections in the nature of a…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Monumental Properties, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Creeger Brick & Building Supply Inc. v. Mid-State Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Somers v. SomersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Baker v. Lafayette CollegeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Field v. Golden Triangle Broadcasting, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by84 opinions
- West Run Student Housing Associates, LLC v. Huntington National BankCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Williams v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Wall Street Network, Ltd. v. New York Times Co.California Court of Appeal · 2008
- District Cablevision Limited Partnership v. BassinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- Donahue v. Federal Express Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.