Legal Opinion

Brink's Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 9, 1982No. Appeals, No. 66 C.D. 1982 and 67 C.D. 1982PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Craig,

In these appeals by Brinks Incorporated and Purolator Armored, Inc. from a grant by the Public Utility Commission (PUC) of temporary contract carrier authority to Miley Detective Agency, Inc. for the operation of armored car service as to which the applicant is also seeking permanent authority, the PUC and the applicant have filed motions to quash on grounds that (1) an order granting temporary contract carrier authority is interlocutory, and (2) the protestants lack standing.

*198Miley previously filed, and is still pursuing, its application for armored car service authority…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Pugar v. GrecoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. T. C. R. Realty, Inc. v. CoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Widoff v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Brink's, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. James A. Mann, Inc. v. Upper Darby School DistrictCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  3. Brink's Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. In re Condemnation by the City of Pittsburgh of Certain LandCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API