Pennsylvania Railroad v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Dissenting Opinion by

Rhodes, P. J.:

I find the majority opinion unacceptable for two basic reasons. First, it is tantamount to an advisory opinion in advance of the application of a regulation promulgated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission;1 secondly, the advice that is given is an erroneous interpretation of the Public Utility Law as it relates to the power of the commission to make regulations in furtherance of the provisions of the law.

The commission by the promulgation of new Rule 10 supplemented its Railroad Regulations. This appeal, as the majority states, is taken from the…