Legal Opinion

Colombo v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 12, 1946No. Appeals, 218, 219 and 220PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Ross, J.,

Albert DeFrancesco, trading and doing business as Hazel Cab Company, on September 27, 1944, applied for the Tight to transport as a common carrier persons upon call and demand in the City of Hazleton, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania. The appellants, taxi operators certificated and authorized to render call and demand service in the area covered by the DeFrancesco application, opposed the granting of the certificate of public convenience applied for. After hearings, the commission on January 15, 1945, dismissed the application on the ground that it had not been established that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  2. John Benkart & Sons Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  3. John Benkart & Sons Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  4. Beaver Valley Service Co. v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. York Express Co. v. P. S. C.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Yellow Cab Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Sayre v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  3. Highway Express Lines, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  4. Follmer Trucking Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  5. Pennsylvania Railroad v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956

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

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

Powered by the Exa API