NEXT
Sign in to follow

The Legal Intelligencer

In Re Condemnation by Sunoco Pipeline L.P., PICS Case No. 17-1141 (Pa. Commw. July 3, 2017) Pellegrini, S. J. (21 pages).

Trial court properly denied condemnees' preliminary objections to pipeline company's declaration of taking because the court had decided that company had a CPC, company was a public utility regulated by the PUC and was authorized to exercise eminent domain and condemnees' notice argument failed because notice was provided to the only party tasked with warranting and defending the alleged and unrecorded bridle path easement. Affirmed.
3 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

Pa. Transp. Serv., Inc. v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm'n, PICS Case No. 17-1145 (Pa. Commw. July 3, 2017) Brobson, J. (11 pages).

PUC properly held that it had no authority over the transfer of "partial rights" to operate a taxi in Philadelphia because the Philadelphia Parking Authority had complete authority over taxi companies providing service within the city and had exclusive authority to grant, deny or impose conditions on the transfer of the portion of operational rights within the city. Affirmed.
3 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

FP Willow Ridge Assoc's, L.P. v. Allen Twp., PICS Case No. 17-1138 (Pa. Commw. July 6, 2017) Wojcik, J. (16 pages).

Claim for refund of sewage fees was not barred by property owner's failure to comply with statute of notification in Refund Act, but claim failed because such fees were authorized by the Municipality Authorities Act. Summary judgment affirmed.
7 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

Metropolitan Edison Co. v. City of Reading, PICS Case No. 17-1118 (Pa. June 20, 2017) Donohue, J., Mundy, J. (concurring), Saylor, C.J. (dissenting) (26 pages).

Commonwealth court erred in finding that appellant failed to establish a claim under the utility exception to the tort claims act because, under the exception, the focus had to be on whether the injuries alleged were caused by a dangerous condition which had its source in the local agency's utility service facility. Reversed.
4 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

With Dissents and Appeals, Landowners Fight to Keep Pipeline Challenge Alive

Pennsylvania landowners who have been fighting with Sunoco over the Mariner East 2 pipeline project have so far been unsuccessful in their attempts to bar the energy giant from using their land for the natural gas pipeline. Over the past year, they have seen a handful of unfavorable decisions from the Commonwealth Court, but with cases potentially on their way to the state Supreme Court and a recent pronouncement on environmental law by the justices, plaintiffs are hoping the litigation won't be over so quickly.
5 minute read

Daily Report Online

Lawyers Turn Out the Lights on Power Co-op Suits After Appellate Ruling

When attorneys sued Georgia's electric power cooperatives on behalf of millions of current and former power customer members, they claimed the cooperatives, known as electric membership corporations, for decades had withheld as much as $2 billion in profits that should have, by law, been distributed regularly to their members.
9 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

HIKO Energy, LLC v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm'n, PICS Case No. 17-0978 (Pa. Commw. June 8, 2017) Simpson, J. (89 pages).

PUC properly imposed a civil penalty on petitioner alternative energy supplier for its intentional overbilling of 5,000 customers for four months and properly calculated the penalty on a "per invoice" method because the penalty was not disproportionate due to the intentional conduct by petitioner's executives, petitioner did not mitigate and only made refunds to customers who complained and PUC properly applied the factors in determining the penalty. Affirmed.
7 minute read

The Recorder

Jacks v. City of Santa Barbara

Cal.Sup.Ct.; S225589 The California Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part a judgment and remanded. The court held that the legality of…
5 minute read

The Recorder

Plantier v. Ramona Municipal Water District

C.A. 4th; D069798 The Fourth Appellate District reversed a judgment. The court held that there is no requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies…
5 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

Alderwoods (PA), Inc. v. Pa. Public Utility Commission, PICS Case No. 17-0839 (Pa. Commw. May 10, 2017) Hearthway, J. (8 pages).

Petitioner's application for review in the Commonwealth Court's original jurisdiction was premature where the matter was still before the public utility commission and, thus, petitioner failed to exhaust its administrative remedies before seeking review in the court's appellate jurisdiction. The Commonwealth Court granted defendants' preliminary objections and dismissed the petition for review in the court's original jurisdiction.
3 minute read

More from ALM

More from ALM

Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.

Resources

  • International Export and Trade Assistance State Law Survey

    Brought to you by LexisNexis®

    Download Now

  • How This Personal Injury Firm Reduced Client Intake Time by 80%

    Brought to you by PracticePanther

    Download Now

  • The Hidden Cost of Bad Reviews: Why Law Firms & Attorneys Can't Afford a Damaged Online Reputation

    Brought to you by Erase.com

    Download Now

  • Leveraging Technology to Improve Employee Engagement and Client Satisfaction

    Brought to you by CARET Legal

    Download Now