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.

AMRAM ENTERPRISES v. PORT AUTHORITY ALLEGHENY COUNTY (11/26/85)

decided: November 26, 1985.

AMRAM ENTERPRISES, INC., APPELLANT
v.
PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in the case of Amram Enterprises, Inc. v. Port Authority of Allegheny County, No. SA 64 of 1984.

COUNSEL

Mary E. Bower, with her, Marvin J. Apple, for appellant.

Mark J. Murphy, with him, Robert M. Brown, Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott, for appellee.

Judges Craig and Barry, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 93 Pa. Commw. Page 202]

Amram Enterprises, Inc. appeals from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County which affirmed the resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of the Port Authority of Allegheny County denying Amram's application to operate a shared ride airport transfer service in Allegheny County.

Amram Enterprises, Inc. applied to the Port Authority of Allegheny County in February of 1983 for a permit to operate an airport transfer service*fn1 proposing to transport passengers by van and station wagon in both directions between the Greater Pittsburgh International Airport and areas in Allegheny County. The authority held public hearings on Amram's application in 1983 on March 16, April 26 and April 27 and made a stenographic record of those proceedings. On December 16, 1983, the board of directors

[ 93 Pa. Commw. Page 203]

    of the authority adopted a resolution and accompanying opinion denying Amram's permit application.

The Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County affirmed the decision of the authority, holding that the authority's decision was in accordance with law, violated no constitutional right of the appellant, was consistent with the procedure required of the appellee and was supported by substantial evidence.

We affirm the conclusion reached by the court of common pleas.

The Second Class County Port Authority Act*fn2 (Port Authority Act) grants the authority exclusive jurisdiction over buses, limousines and other nonexclusive forms of transportation within the authority's service area. Regarding exclusive forms of transportation, that is, taxicabs, the Public ...


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.