PETER DANIELS REALTY v. NORTHERN EQU. INV

2 Citing cases

  1. Strausser Enters., Inc. v. Segal & Morel, Inc.

    89 A.3d 292 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014)   Cited 7 times

    Section 1927 of the Statutory Construction Act indicates that “[s]tatutes uniform with those of other states shall be interpreted and construed to effect their general purpose to make uniform the laws of those states which enact them.” 1 Pa.C.S. § 1927. However, the Colorado court's interpretation of “award” conflicts with our Supreme Court's interpretation of “award,” and we are in no position to alter or create an exception to our Supreme Court's interpretation. SeePeter Daniels Realty, Inc. v. Northern Equity Investors, Group, Inc., 829 A.2d 721, 723 (Pa.Super.2003) ( “[W]e are bound by holdings of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.”). We conclude that no common law arbitration award exists in this case.

  2. Crossman v. Res. MS Stonybrook NJ MFP LLC

    DOCKET NO. A-3309-15T4 (App. Div. Mar. 27, 2018)

    As amici New Jersey Apartment Association and National Apartment Association note, a number of courts in other jurisdictions have found arrangements between a landlord and a tenant for service of utilities are not "public" in nature and do not subject the provider to regulation as a public utility. See, e.g., Peter Daniels Realty, Inc. v. N. Equity Inv'rs, Grp., 829 A.2d 721, 722 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2003) ("[U]nless the water service is available to all members of the public who may require it, such a provider is not a 'public utility'"); Baker v. Pub. Serv. Co., 606 P.2d 567, 571 (Okla. 1980) ("[I]t has been consistently found . . . that landlords who only submeter electricity to their tenants are not public utilities."); see also Zehm v. Morgan Props., No. 1:17-CV-1758, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178964, at *23-26 (D.N.J. 2017) (citing Antique Village and holding, under facts nearly identical to this case, "the allocation of charges for water are incidental to the dominant service provided by [defendants] — the leasing of apartments," and the landlord is not subject to BPU regulation); Phillip E. Haggman, Landlord Supplying Electricity, Gas, Water, or Similar Facility to Tenant as Subject to Utility Regulation, 75 A.L.R. 3d 1204, 1208 (1977) ("The courts have uniformly rejected the need for consumer protection as the basis for public utility regulation of landlords who supply utility serv