Bush v. Public Service Commission
66 A.3d 1123
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2013Background
- Hurricane Irene disrupted Maryland electric service, prompting a consolidated PSC inquiry into utility companies.
- Bush, a Catonsville landlord, sought a $50 million PSC fine against BGE for reliability failures.
- PSC issued Order No. 84445 on October 31, 2011 directing actions; no fines were imposed.
- Bush filed a petition for judicial review within 30 days of the Order but mailed it late.
- Clerk received the petition December 2, 2011, after the November 30 deadline.
- Circuit Court dismissed as untimely; Bush appealed challenging the mailbox rule applicability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Md. Rule 1-203(c) applies to extend the filing period. | Bush argues mailbox rule adds 3 days and online notice counts as notice. | Commission contends filing and mailing differ; Rule 1-203(c) does not apply here. | Rule 1-203(c) does not apply; petition untimely. |
Key Cases Cited
- Renehan v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n., 231 Md. 59 (Md. 1963) (mailing not equivalent to filing; deadlines run from action date or notice)
- Kamara v. Edison Bros. Apparel Stores, Inc., 136 Md.App. 333 (Md. Ct. App. 2001) (Rule 1-203(c) applies only when service triggers the clock)
- Chance v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth., 173 Md.App. 645 (Md. Ct. App. 2007) (extra 3 days not allowed when period begins by event other than service)
- Jackson v. Dackman Co., 181 Md.App. 546 (Md. Ct. App. 2008) (mailing not equivalent to filing for regulatory renewals; mailbox rule not applicable here)
- Levy v. Glens Falls Indem. Co., 210 Md. 265 (Md. 1956) (filing vs. mailing distinctions established)
- Bock v. Ins. Comm’r of Md., 84 Md.App. 724 (Md. Ct. App. 1990) (’send’ and ‘mailed’ synonymous, but ‘filing’ not equivalent to ‘sending’)