fair value rule (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

fair value rule in Pennsylvania

9 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1953–2018 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
City of Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commissiongreen
pasuperct · 1952 · cited in 4 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1953–1978
2 sentences

1978In its opinion, at City of Pittsburgh v. Pa. P.U.C., 171 Pa. Superior Ct. 187, 198-99, 1952 , the Court stated: ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property; it was never intended that fair value be the equivalent of market price or cost at current prices.

1958“Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property; . . .” 5 City of Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, supra, 171 Pa. Superior Ct. 187, 198, 199 , 90 A. 2d 607, 613 .

34
Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co.green
scotus · 1942 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978
2 sentences

1978See Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 315 U.S. 575, 599, 609 , 62 S.Ct. 736, 749, 753 , 86 L.Ed. 1037 (1942) (Black, Douglas, and Murphy, JJ., concurring; Frankfurter, J., concurring); McCart v. Indianapolis Water Co., 302 U.S. 419, 423 , 58 S.Ct. 324, 326 , 82 L.Ed. 336 (1938) (Black, J., dissenting); West v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 295 U.S. 662, 680 , 55 S.Ct. 894, 901 , 79 L.Ed. 1640 (1935) (Stone, J., joined by Brandeis and Cardozo, JJ., dissenting); O’Fallon R.

1978See Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 315 U.S. 575, 599, 609 , 62 S.Ct. 736, 749, 753 , 86 L.Ed. 1037 (1942) (Black, Douglas, and Murphy, JJ., concurring; Frankfurter, J., concurring); McCart v. Indianapolis Water Co., 302 U.S. 419, 423 , 58 S.Ct. 324, 326 , 82 L.Ed. 336 (1938) (Black, J., dissenting); West v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 295 U.S. 662, 680 , 55 S.Ct. 894, 901 , 79 L.Ed. 1640 (1935) (Stone, J., joined by Brandeis and Cardozo, JJ., dissenting); O’Fallon R.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (14)

CaseCitedYears
Bonenberger v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance green
pasuperct · 2002
2 sentences

2018Bonenberger , 791 A.2d at 382 .

2018Bonenberger, 791 A.2d at 382 .

22018–2018
Solar Electric Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1939
2 sentences

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

21960–1961
Scranton v. Scranton Steam Heat Co. green
pa · 1961
1 sentence

1983Scranton v. Scranton Steam Heat Co., at 401-402, 176 A.2d at 88 .

11983–1983
McCart v. Indianapolis Water Co. green
scotus · 1938
2 sentences

1978See Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 315 U.S. 575, 599, 609 , 62 S.Ct. 736, 749, 753 , 86 L.Ed. 1037 (1942) (Black, Douglas, and Murphy, JJ., concurring; Frankfurter, J., concurring); McCart v. Indianapolis Water Co., 302 U.S. 419, 423 , 58 S.Ct. 324, 326 , 82 L.Ed. 336 (1938) (Black, J., dissenting); West v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 295 U.S. 662, 680 , 55 S.Ct. 894, 901 , 79 L.Ed. 1640 (1935) (Stone, J., joined by Brandeis and Cardozo, JJ., dissenting); O’Fallon R.

1978See Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 315 U.S. 575, 599, 609 , 62 S.Ct. 736, 749, 753 , 86 L.Ed. 1037 (1942) (Black, Douglas, and Murphy, JJ., concurring; Frankfurter, J., concurring); McCart v. Indianapolis Water Co., 302 U.S. 419, 423 , 58 S.Ct. 324, 326 , 82 L.Ed. 336 (1938) (Black, J., dissenting); West v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 295 U.S. 662, 680 , 55 S.Ct. 894, 901 , 79 L.Ed. 1640 (1935) (Stone, J., joined by Brandeis and Cardozo, JJ., dissenting); O’Fallon R.

11978–1978
West v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. of Baltimore green
scotus · 1935
2 sentences

1978See Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 315 U.S. 575, 599, 609 , 62 S.Ct. 736, 749, 753 , 86 L.Ed. 1037 (1942) (Black, Douglas, and Murphy, JJ., concurring; Frankfurter, J., concurring); McCart v. Indianapolis Water Co., 302 U.S. 419, 423 , 58 S.Ct. 324, 326 , 82 L.Ed. 336 (1938) (Black, J., dissenting); West v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 295 U.S. 662, 680 , 55 S.Ct. 894, 901 , 79 L.Ed. 1640 (1935) (Stone, J., joined by Brandeis and Cardozo, JJ., dissenting); O’Fallon R.

1978See Federal Power Commission v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 315 U.S. 575, 599, 609 , 62 S.Ct. 736, 749, 753 , 86 L.Ed. 1037 (1942) (Black, Douglas, and Murphy, JJ., concurring; Frankfurter, J., concurring); McCart v. Indianapolis Water Co., 302 U.S. 419, 423 , 58 S.Ct. 324, 326 , 82 L.Ed. 336 (1938) (Black, J., dissenting); West v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., 295 U.S. 662, 680 , 55 S.Ct. 894, 901 , 79 L.Ed. 1640 (1935) (Stone, J., joined by Brandeis and Cardozo, JJ., dissenting); O’Fallon R.

11978–1978
Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1952
2 sentences

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

11961–1961
Riverton Consolidated Water Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1958
2 sentences

1961In addition, reproduction cost of a utility’s facilities is a factor which must be considered and weighed by the Commission in arriving at “fair value”: Pittsburgh v. Pa. P. U. C., supra; Pittsburgh v. Pa. P. U. C., 171 Pa. Superior Ct. 187 , 90 A. 2d 607 ; Riverton Consolidated Water Co. v. Pa. P. U. C., 186 Pa. Superior Ct. 1 , 140 A. 2d 114 ; Solar Electric Company v. Pa. P. U. C., supra. The only reason for according little or no weight to the cost of reproduction is where the facilities have become so obsolete as to make highly improbable and unlikely the facilities’ reproduction: Philade

1961In addition, reproduction cost of a utility's facilities is a factor which must be considered and weighed by the Commission in arriving at "fair value": Pittsburgh v. Pa. P.U.C., supra; Pittsburgh v. Pa. P.U.C., 171 Pa. Superior Ct. 187 , 90 A. 2d 607 ; Riverton Consolidated Water Co. v. Pa. P.U.C., 186 Pa. Superior Ct. 1 , 140 A. 2d 114 ; Solar Electric Company v. Pa. P.U.C., supra. The only reason for according little or no weight to the cost of reproduction is where the facilities have become so obsolete as to make highly improbable and unlikely the facilities' reproduction: Philadelphia v.

11961–1961
Philadelphia v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1953
2 sentences

1961In addition, reproduction cost of a utility’s facilities is a factor which must be considered and weighed by the Commission in arriving at “fair value”: Pittsburgh v. Pa. P. U. C., supra; Pittsburgh v. Pa. P. U. C., 171 Pa. Superior Ct. 187 , 90 A. 2d 607 ; Riverton Consolidated Water Co. v. Pa. P. U. C., 186 Pa. Superior Ct. 1 , 140 A. 2d 114 ; Solar Electric Company v. Pa. P. U. C., supra. The only reason for according little or no weight to the cost of reproduction is where the facilities have become so obsolete as to make highly improbable and unlikely the facilities’ reproduction: Philade

1961In addition, reproduction cost of a utility’s facilities is a factor which must be considered and weighed by the Commission in arriving at “fair value”: Pittsburgh v. Pa. P. U. C., supra; Pittsburgh v. Pa. P. U. C., 171 Pa. Superior Ct. 187 , 90 A. 2d 607 ; Riverton Consolidated Water Co. v. Pa. P. U. C., 186 Pa. Superior Ct. 1 , 140 A. 2d 114 ; Solar Electric Company v. Pa. P. U. C., supra. The only reason for according little or no weight to the cost of reproduction is where the facilities have become so obsolete as to make highly improbable and unlikely the facilities’ reproduction: Philade

11961–1961
Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1954
2 sentences

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

11961–1961
Scranton-Spring Brook Water Service Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1949
2 sentences

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

11961–1961
Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1943
2 sentences

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

1961There is no particular formula by which the Commission is bound in fixing the rate base; all facts which have a relevant bearing on fair value, as that term is used in rate proceedings, should be considered . . . ‘Under the fair value rule prevailing in this state, consideration should be given to original cost and average price reproduction cost of the property;...’” Original cost means original cost of construction of the facilities and is a factor which must be considered by the Commission in arriving at the “fair, value” for rate making purposes: Harrisburg Steel Corp. v. Pa. P. U. C., 176

11961–1961
Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1958
1 sentence

1960Solar Electric Company v. Pa. P. U. C., 137 Pa. Superior Ct. 325, 335 , 9 A. 2d 447 ; Pittsburgh v. Pa. P. U. C., 187 Pa. Superior Ct. 341, 349 , 144 A. 2d 648 .

11960–1960
Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1951
2 sentences

1953We also said in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 169 Pa. Superior Ct. 400, 405 , 82 A. 2d 515 : "Under Equitable Gas Company v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 160 Pa. Superior Ct. 458 , 463 et seq., 51 A. 2d 497 , and the cases therein cited, the Commission must consider `reproduction costs of the property, based upon the fair average price of materials, property and labor . . .' This reproduction cost is merely one of six elements entering into the determination of the fair value of the physical property." *16 Recently in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility

1953We also said in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 169 Pa. Superior Ct. 400, 405 , 82 A. 2d 515 : "Under Equitable Gas Company v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 160 Pa. Superior Ct. 458 , 463 et seq., 51 A. 2d 497 , and the cases therein cited, the Commission must consider `reproduction costs of the property, based upon the fair average price of materials, property and labor . . .' This reproduction cost is merely one of six elements entering into the determination of the fair value of the physical property." *16 Recently in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility

11953–1953
Equitable Gas Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission green
pasuperct · 1946
2 sentences

1953We also said in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 169 Pa. Superior Ct. 400, 405 , 82 A. 2d 515 : "Under Equitable Gas Company v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 160 Pa. Superior Ct. 458 , 463 et seq., 51 A. 2d 497 , and the cases therein cited, the Commission must consider `reproduction costs of the property, based upon the fair average price of materials, property and labor . . .' This reproduction cost is merely one of six elements entering into the determination of the fair value of the physical property." *16 Recently in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility

1953We also said in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 169 Pa. Superior Ct. 400, 405 , 82 A. 2d 515 : "Under Equitable Gas Company v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 160 Pa. Superior Ct. 458 , 463 et seq., 51 A. 2d 497 , and the cases therein cited, the Commission must consider `reproduction costs of the property, based upon the fair average price of materials, property and labor . . .' This reproduction cost is merely one of six elements entering into the determination of the fair value of the physical property." *16 Recently in Pittsburgh v. Pennsylvania Public Utility

11953–1953

Where else courts name it

DE 13 (1992–2025) PA 9 (1953–2018) MD 6 (1952–1993) IL 5 (1966–2009) CA 4 (1998–2021) AZ 4 (1987–2016) NM 3 (2007–2008) IA 2 (2015–2021)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check