Legal Opinion

Llyod v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 1, 2011No. 496 C.D. 2010PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

Judge BROBSON.

Petitioner William Lloyd, Small Business Advocate (SBA), petitions for review of two orders of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC). The PUC’s first order approved the joint application of Embarq Pennsylvania (Embarq PA), now known as The United Telephone Company of Pennsylvania d/b/a CenturyLink, 1 and Embarq Communications 2 , 3 (collectively either Embarq, Joint Applicants, or the companies, as pertinent) for the indirect transfer of control of the Joint Applicants to CenturyTel (to which the PUC referred collectively as the Merging Parties). The PUC…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Popowsky v. Pennsylvania Public UtilitySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. York v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  3. Northern Pennsylvania Power Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. PECO Energy Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Popowsky v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Mercury Trucking, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  2. Capital City Cab Serv. v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm'nCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  3. PPL Electric Utilities Corp. v. PUCCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API