Procedure for authority to acquire or dispose of utility assets or securities (§ 56-90)—Virginia Decoded

Procedure for authority to acquire or dispose of utility assets or securities

Application for authority to acquire or dispose of utility assets or utility securities under § 56-89 shall be by petition to the Commission. The petition may be joint or several. It shall be signed and verified by the president or any vice-president and the secretary or any assistant secretary of the petitioner. The petition shall clearly summarize the object in view, the proposed procedure and the terms and conditions thereof. Upon the filing of the petition, if the Commission shall deem a hearing necessary, the Commission shall assign the matter for prompt hearing. If and when the Commission, with or without hearing, shall be satisfied that adequate service to the public at just and reasonable rates will not be impaired or jeopardized by granting the prayer of the petition, the Commission shall make such order in the premises as it may deem proper and the circumstances require, and thereupon it shall be lawful to do the things provided for in such order, subject, however, to the exception contained in § 56-89 as to counties and municipalities.

History

1940, p. 426; Michie Code 1942, § 3774o.

Download

Court Decisions

Town of Clarksville, Va. v. United States (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 08/05/52)
. . . . 953, certiorari denied 326 U.S. 743, 66 S.Ct. 56, 90 L.Ed. 444; United States v. Wheeler Township, . . .

United States v. J. Wilton Hunt, Sr. (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 11/28/84)
. . . stricter. California v. Green, 399 U.S. 149, 155-56, 90 S.Ct. 1930, 1933-34, 26 L.Ed.2d 489 (1970) . . .

United States v. Robert P. McCall (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 08/17/84)
. . . ; California v. Green, supra, 399 U.S. at 155-56, 90 S.Ct. at 1933-34. See also Barber v. Page, . . .

. . . Leaf Tobacco Exporters Association, Inc., (The . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 12/05/84)
. . . quot;protected or regulated." Id., at 155-56, 90 S.Ct. at 830-31. In this case, the exporters . . .

Doyle Delmar Royal v. State of Maryland (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 01/26/76)
. . . suggestive lineup. See Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1, 5--6, 90 S.Ct. 1999, 26 L.Ed.2d 387 (1970). . . .

Hill v. Com. (COA, 08/19/86)
. . . The Court did not accept this argument. Id. at 5-6, 90 S.Ct. at 2001-02. . . .

United States v. Ringley (District Court, W.D. Virginia, 11/02/90)
. . . Woodruff, 327 U.S. 726, 732, 66 S.Ct. 853, 855-56, 90 L.Ed. 970 (1946)); accord Shoup v. Bell & . . .

. . . St. Luke Gregory, Jr. v. State of North Carolina Attorney . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 04/04/90)
. . . hearsay," California v. Green, 399 U.S. 149, 155-56, 90 S.Ct. 1930, 1933-34, 26 L.Ed.2d 489 (1970), . . .

Hogan v. Paderick (District Court, E.D. Virginia, 08/06/75)
. . . Cir. 1973); Cf. Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1, 5-6, 90 S.Ct. 1999, 26 L.Ed.2d 387 (1970). The Court . . .

Court opinions are provided by CourtListener, which is developed by the Free Law Project.