Court granted utility's application for summary relief as to §§ 263B-3, 263B-4(6) and 263D-1 of a city ordinance enacted to manage the city's right of way and public utility use of the right of way because those sections were preempted by code and invalid and city was enjoined from enforcing them but §263B-5, imposing an annual maintenance fee, was not a public utility regulation and was not preempted. Summary relief granted.
November 03, 2015 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Regulation • City Ordinance • Preemption • Public Utility Commission
PPL Elec. Utils. Corp. v. City of Lancaster, PICS Case No. 15-1610 (Pa. Commw. Oct. 15, 2015) McCullough (37 pages).
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
ABOUT THIS RECRUITMENTOur attorneys face some of the most challenging, cutting-edge legal issues in the environmental field. As such, we ar...
Hofstra University enrolls over 6,000 undergraduate students and nearly 4,000 graduate students in 13 schools, which feature a variety of de...
McCarter & English, LLP is actively seeking a patent associate, patent agent, or technical specialist for its Intellectual Property Prac...
