Skip to main content
· 6/26/1920

Suburban Water Co. v. Oakmont Borough

Citations

  • 268 Pa. 243
  • 110 A. 778
  • 1920 Pa. LEXIS 666

Syllabus

<p>Public Service Commission — Water companies — Change of rates ■ — Boroughs—Reasonableness of rates — Burden of proof — Act of July 26, 1918, P. L. 1878 — Notice—Effective rate — Contracts—Act of July 6, 1917, P. L. 704 — Impairment of obligation of contract— Federal and State Constitution — Execution under control of court.</p> <p>1. Where a public service company has filed a schedule of rates, and a complaint is filed against the reasonableness of the rates within the thirty days before the schedule becomes effective, as provided by the Act of July 26, 1913, P. L. 1378, the burden of proof is on the utility to prove the rates reasonable; but, if the complaint is made after the schedule becomes effective, the burden is on the complainant to prove them unreasonable.</p> <p>2. Whether a complaint is filed before or after the thirty-day period, if the utility has complied with the provisions of the statute as to notice of the time when the proposed change will go into effect, the rate becomes, on the effective date, an effective rate, and, as such, it is a collectible rate, or one that may be sued for. Injustice done to consumers may be worked out on petition for reparation.</p> <p>3. There can be no legal rate except the last tariff rate published a3 provided by the Act of 1913, section 7, article III, section 1 (E and F), article II, and section 41, article VI, and the effective rate thus published supersedes all prior rates covering the service therein called for.</p> <p>4. The Public Service Act does not recognize any right to change a rate other than a published tariff rate, either in an individual or a municipality.</p> <p>5. A utility may not of its own motion have an affirmative order approving its rates.</p> <p>6. Where a borough files a complaint against the reasonableness of rates filed by a water company, it cannot, pending a decision of the Public Service Commission, and in a suit against it by the company to recover for water at the rate specified by t

Judges: Brown, Frazer, Kephart, Mosohzisker, Simpson, Stewart, Walling

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.