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.

DAVID E. BLAKE v. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION (04/19/79)

decided: April 19, 1979.

DAVID E. BLAKE, PETITIONER
v.
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, RESPONDENT; NEAL BULK TRANSPORT, INC. ET AL., INTERVENORS



Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission in case of In Re: Application of David E. Blake for Amendment to his Common Carrier Certificate, Docket No. A. 99659 F.1, Am-A.

COUNSEL

Blair F. Green, with him Green and Bish, for petitioner.

Robert A. Christianson, Assistant Counsel, with him Alfred N. Lowenstein, Deputy Chief Counsel, and George M. Kashi, Acting Chief Counsel, for respondent.

Charles J. Streiff, with him Wick, Vuono & Lavelle, for intervenors.

Judges Wilkinson, Jr., Mencer and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Wilkinson, Jr.

Author: Wilkinson

[ 42 Pa. Commw. Page 103]

Petitioner applied to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (Commission) for additional authority to haul coal, building construction materials, in bulk, brick, clay or clay products, including tile, from and to specified counties and locations, with no haul to exceed an airline distance of 95 statute miles. This was later amended to make certain limited specific restrictions which amendment resulted in some original protestants withdrawing. Hearings were held with testimony being offered by both petitioner and protestants.

The Administrative Law Judge, after a rather detailed and extensive review of the testimony, entered an order, subject to Commission approval, denying petitioner's application.

A memorandum was prepared by the Chief of the Motor Transportation Section of the Commission's Bureau of Transportation in response to the Commission's request for an analysis of the rights held by the protestants.*fn1 Having made the analysis of the rights requested, the Chief of Motor Transportation gratuitously concluded:

[ 42 Pa. Commw. Page 104]

The testimony in support of the application is extremely weak. In the opinion of the writer, a grant of authority as applied for could not be sustained in court. If weight is to be accorded to the testimony, and a right granted under this application, it appears the most that could be sustained would be as follows:

To transport, as a Class D carrier, coal between points in the Counties of Armstrong, and Butler, and from points in said counties to points in 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.