Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

FRANK MANGANELL v. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION (04/18/75)

decided: April 18, 1975.

FRANK MANGANELL, JR., TRADING AS FLEETWOOD LIMOUSINE SERVICE, APPELLANT,
v.
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, APPELLEE, AND DANIEL PETER GABRIEL, INTERVENING APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission in case of In Re: Application of Daniel Peter Gabriel, No. 97880.

COUNSEL

Cletus P. Lyman, for appellant.

Thomas C. Dick, Assistant Counsel, with him Edward Munce, Acting Counsel, for appellee.

Lawrence M. Klemow, with him Glassberg & Klemow, for intervening appellee.

President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer, Mencer, Rogers and Blatt. Judge Wilkinson, Jr., did not participate. Opinion by Judge Kramer.

Author: Kramer

[ 18 Pa. Commw. Page 374]

This is an appeal by Frank Manganell (Manganell) from an order of the Public Utility Commission (Commission) dated August 14, 1974, in which the Commission granted a certificate of public convenience to Daniel P. Gabriel (Gabriel), authorizing Gabriel to operate a limousine service in the vicinity of Hazleton, Pennsylvania. Manganell is the owner-operator of the only pre-existing limousine service in Hazleton and he appeared as a protestant before the Commission.

Gabriel's application was considered by the Commission pursuant to section 203 of the Public Utility Law (Act), Act of May 28, 1937, P.L. 1053, as amended, 66 P.S. § 1123, which provides, in pertinent part:

"A certificate of public convenience shall be granted by order of the commission, only if and when the commission shall find or determine that the granting of such certificate is necessary or proper for the service, accommodation, convenience, or safety of the public. . . ."

Our power to review the Commission's order is likewise governed by statute. Section 1107 of the Act, 66 P.S. § 1437, provides in part:

[ 18 Pa. Commw. Page 375]

"The order of the commission shall not be vacated or set aside, either in whole or in part, except for error of law or lack of evidence to support the finding, determination, or order of the commission, or violation of constitutional rights."

The only real issue presented by this appeal is whether the Commission's finding that "a reasonable need exists on the part of the public for the proposed service" is supported by the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.