NARRAGANSETT ELECTRIC COMPANY v. Harsch
This text of 352 A.2d 400 (NARRAGANSETT ELECTRIC COMPANY v. Harsch) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The NARRAGANSETT ELECTRIC COMPANY
v.
William W. HARSCH et al.
Supreme Court of Rhode Island.
Edwards & Angell, Knight Edwards, Edward F. Hindle, Deming E. Sherman, Providence, for petitioner.
Julius C. Michaelson, Atty. Gen., R. Daniel Prentiss, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Roberts & Willey Incorporated, Dennis J. Roberts II, (for Consumers' Council) Providence, for respondents.
ORDER
The petitioner's motion that the Attorney General be disallowed from filing a brief in the within case is denied without prejudice to raising the issue in its brief and in oral argument. Counsel for the parties are ordered to discuss in their briefs and oral arguments, in addition to other questions presented, the question of whether the Attorney General represented the public or the Public Utilities Commission and whether or not the Public Utilities Commission is a proper party to this appeal. See Hassell v. Zoning Bd. of Review of E. Providence, 108 R.I. 349, 275 A.2d 646 (1971).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
352 A.2d 400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/narragansett-electric-company-v-harsch-ri-1976.