Skip to main content
· 10/30/1918

Wilkes-Barre Co. v. Public Service Commission

Citations

  • 70 Pa. Super. 464
  • 1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 277

Syllabus

<p>Public Service Commission — Appeals—Time within which appeal must be ialcen — Act of July 26, 1913, Art. VI, Sec. 14, P. L. 1424-</p> <p>Where a light company applies to the Public Service Commission for a certificate of public convenience approving a contract between the company and the city, and another company files a protest, but does not intervene and become a party to the proceedings in the manner provided by Section 14 of Art. VI of the Public Service Company Law of July 26, 1913, P. L. 1424, the protesting company is not entitled to notice of the “determination” of the commission; and if it is entitled to appeal at all it must do so “within thirty days after the filing” of the determination by the commission.</p> <p>Public Service Commission — Light companies — Contract with city — Jurisdiction of commission.</p> <p>Where a light company petitions the Public Service Commission for a certificate of public convenience evidencing the approval of an ordinance contract ordained by a city prescribing the conditions upon which the city would consent to the entry upon its streets by the company, the existence of a contract, absolutely binding upon the city and the company is not necessary to the exercise of jurisdiction by the commission, if it appears that the ordinance was not enacted until after the passage of the Public Service Company Act, that it did not require the company to enter into any contract until after the approval by the commission, but did provide in effect that the company might enter upon the streets if it accepted the provisions of the ordinance by a corporate action within ninety days, or all its property and equipment to be forfeited to the city, with a further provision that if the company were prevented by litigation from taking such action the time for so doing should not begin to run until from the date of the final disposition of such litigation.</p> <p>It is not the function of the Superior Court to act as a second administrative comm

Judges: Head, Henderson, Kephart, Orladt, Porter, Poster, Trexler, Williams

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.