68 A.3d 15
Pa. Commw. Ct.2013Background
- WMPI owns land in Gilberton, Schuylkill County, with existing electric facilities installed by PPL under a prior right-of-way.
- PPL filed a Declaration on January 24, 2011 seeking a perpetual easement and right-of-way to construct, operate, maintain, and potentially reconstruct electric facilities on WMPI’s land.
- WMPI filed Preliminary Objections on February 17, 2011 alleging lack of PUC approval under Section 1511, lack of specificity, and failure to name an indispensable party.
- Depositions established the facilities on WMPI’s land were existing distribution lines and that PPL had no current plans for new construction; potential for relocation could create new facilities, and the Declaration appeared broad enough to authorize future new facilities.
- The trial court, relying on representations by PPL, held that 1511(e) was not triggered and that PPL intended only to maintain existing facilities; the court denied WMPI’s objections, and WMPI appealed seeking reversal of the order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PPL must obtain PUC approval under Section 1511(c) before condemning WMPI’s land | WMPI asserts 1511(c) requires PUC approval for condemnation; Declaration permits future construction. | PPL contends only existing distribution facilities are involved; 1511(c) does not apply to maintenance. | Requires PUC approval; reversal of trial court. |
| Whether the Declaration’s broad language extends to new facilities triggering 1511(c) | Declaration allows constructing and maintaining facilities at all times in the future. | Declaration limits to existing facilities or immediate needs; no new facilities contemplated. | Declaration broad enough to encompass new facilities; PUC approval required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Township of Millcreek v. Angela Cres Trust, 25 A.3d 1288 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2011) (eminent domain powers strictly construed; limits of authority)
- Olson v. Whitpain Township, 595 A.2d 706 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1991) (strict construction of eminent domain authority)
- In re Legislative Route 1018, Section 4, 422 Pa. 594, 222 A.2d 906 (Pa. 1966) (limits on legislative grant of condemnation power)
- Appeal of McKonly, 618 A.2d 1169 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1992) (preliminary objections determine whether to take evidence on issues of fact)
- Valley Rural Electric Co-operative, Inc. v. Shanholtzer, 982 A.2d 566 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2009) (abuse of discretion standard in condemnation matters)
- Re Condemnation of Springboro Area Water Authority of Property of Gillette, 898 A.2d 6 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2006) (review of condemnation decisions in eminent domain)