Appeals from the Order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission in the cases of H. Z. Associates, A Pennsylvania Limited Partnership trading as Howard Johnson Motor Lodge v. Airlines Transportation Company, No. C-79030802 and Jonathan B. Robison and William Schlenke v. Airlines Transportation Company, No. C-78030232.
Richard S. Dorfzaun, with him Eugene F. Scanlon, Jr., David B. Fawcett, Jr., and Robert J. Marino, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, for petitioner.
Eric A. Rohrbaugh, Assistant Counsel, with him Alfred N. Lowenstein, Deputy Chief Counsel, and Joseph J. Malatesta, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.
Robert Raphael, with him Bradley S. Gelder, Robert Raphael, P.C., for intervenor, Howard Johnson Motor Lodge.
Jonathan B. Robison, for intervenors, Jonathan B. Robison and William Schlenke.
President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges Blatt and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by President Judge Crumlish. Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by Judge Blatt.
[ 63 Pa. Commw. Page 299]
Two Public Utility Commission orders directed Airlines to provide additional limousine service between the City of Pittsburgh and Greater Pittsburgh
[ 63 Pa. Commw. Page 300]
International Airport. Airlines appeals, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
Airlines, a common carrier, is the sole provider of airport limousine service in Pittsburgh. Prior to this action, Airlines provided transportation to Hotel Webster Hall, located in the Oakland area of Pittsburgh. When Webster Hall was converted to apartments, Airlines substituted service to the Crossgates Inn, also located in Oakland.
Two actions were instituted against Airlines: the first by residents of the Bellefield area of Oakland, requesting that service be reinstated at Webster Hall, the second by Howard Johnson's, an Oakland hotel, alleging that Airlines' failure to provide service there constituted an unreasonable prejudice and disadvantage pursuant to Section 1502 of the Public Utility Code (Code), 66 Pa. C.S. § 1502. The Commission ordered Airlines to resume service to Webster Hall and to provide additional service to Howard Johnson's.
Our scope of review is limited to a determination of whether the Commission violated constitutional rights, committed an error of law, or its findings were supported by substantial evidence, West Penn Power Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 57 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 148, 422 A.2d ...