Turtle Creek Borough v. Pennsylvania Water Co.
Citations
- 243 Pa. 401
- 90 A. 194
- 1914 Pa. LEXIS 637
Syllabus
<p>Practice, Supreme Court — Equity practice — Findings of fact.</p> <p>1. It is not ground for reversal on findings of fact of a court of first instance that a different conclusion might have been warranted from the evidence or that the appellate court might have arrived at a different result if called upon to determine the facta as a court of first instance. The duty of the appellate court in reviewing findings of fact is to ascertain whether there was tesi* inony, which, if believed, would sustain the findings. • ■</p> <p>■ Corporations — Water companies — Water rates — Act of April 29, 1874, P- L. 78, Sec. 84 — Valuation of plant — Reasonable rates.</p> <p>■2. In a suit in equity to restrain a water company from shutting off a supply of water to consumers who refused to sign contracts to pay increased rates and to have the court inquire into the reasonableness of the proposed increase of rates, under the Act of April 29, 1874, P. L. 73, Section 34, where the valuation by the court of the plant of the water company as a basis for ascertaining reasonable rates, was complained of, where it appeared that such valuation had been determined after considering all the evidence presented and there was testimony to support the conclusions of fact reached by the court below, the Supreme Court will not on appeal reverse the findings of fact of the chancellor.</p> <p>3. The lower court made no error in such case in not setting out in its findings each separate item of value and taking the sum total of such separate items as the value of the plant, where in its opinion it stated that all items had been considered in fixing the value of the plant.</p> <p>4. Water rates established by a court of equity under the Act of April 29, 1874, P. L. 73, Section 34, must not be confiscatory and must be such as to yield a fair return upon a just valuation of the plant. Where there is evidence to support a finding that the rates as established will yield a fair return upon the capital inve
Judges: Brown, Elkin, Fell, Moschzisker, Pot, Ter
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.