Pa. Indus. Energy Coalition v. Pa. Puc

670 A.2d 1152, 543 Pa. 307
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedFebruary 13, 1996
StatusPublished

This text of 670 A.2d 1152 (Pa. Indus. Energy Coalition v. Pa. Puc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pa. Indus. Energy Coalition v. Pa. Puc, 670 A.2d 1152, 543 Pa. 307 (Pa. 1996).

Opinion

543 Pa. 307 (1996)
670 A.2d 1152

PENNSYLVANIA INDUSTRIAL ENERGY COALITION
v.
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, Duquesne Light Company, Pennsylvania Power Company, Metropolitan Edison Company, Pennsylvania Electric Company, Citizens Action Coalition, Office of Consumer Advocate, West Penn Power Company, Philadelphia Electric Company, Sierra Club and Delaware Valley Citizens Council for Clean Air (the Environmentalists), Pennsylvania Power and Light Company, Pennsylvania Gas Association, Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, Peco Energy Company, Intervenors.
Appeal of PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued January 25, 1996.
Decided February 13, 1996.

Kevin J. Moody, for Public Utility Com'n.

Alan J. Barak, Harrisburg, for The Environmentalists, Intervenor.

David M. Kleppinger, Harrisburg, Derrick P. Williamson, Harrisburg, for P.I.E. Coalition.

Jeffrey A. Franklin, Reading, for MET-ED, Intervenor.

Lauren S. McAndrews, Pittsburgh, for Allegheny Ludlum Corp., Intervenor.

Tanya J. McCloskey, Harrisburg, for Office of Consumer Advocate, Intervenor.

*308 Dann Regan, Harrisburg, for PGA — Intervenor.

Andre C. Dasent, Philadelphia, for Citizens Action Coalition, Intervenor.

Ward L. Smith, Philadelphia, for PECO, Intervenor.

John L. Munsch, Greensburg, for West Power, Intervenor.

Stephen L. Feld, New Castle, for PA Power, Intervenor.

Before NIX, C.J., and FLAHERTY, ZAPPALA, CAPPY, CASTILLE and NIGRO, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Based on its opinion, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is affirmed.

NEWMAN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
670 A.2d 1152, 543 Pa. 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pa-indus-energy-coalition-v-pa-puc-pa-1996.