Germantown Cab Co., et al v. Phila Parking Auth - No. (Granted) (petitions for allowance of appeal)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT GERMANTOWN CAB COMPANY, BUCKS COUNTY SERVICES, INC., CONCORD LIMOUSINE, INC., DEE DEE CAB COMPANY AND MCT TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTHORITY PETITION OF: BUCKS COUNTY SERVICES, INC. GERMANTOWN CAB COMPANY, BUCKS COUNTY SERVICES, INC., CONCORD LIMOUSINE, INC., DEE DEE CAB COMPANY AND MCT TRANSPORTATION v. PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTHORITY PETITION OF: GERMANTOWN CAB COMPANY : No. 532 EAL 2017 : : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from : the Order of the Commonwealth Court : : : : : : : : : : : No. 533 EAL 2017 : : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal from : the Order of the Commonwealth Court : : : : : : : : : : ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 30th day of April, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, Philadelphia Parking Authority, are: (1) Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law by holding 53 Pa.C.S. § 5707(c) facially unconstitutional? a. Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law by holding that the assessment method set forth in 53 Pa.C.S. § 5707(c) violates Respondents’ rights to substantive due process? b. Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law by holding that the assessment method set forth in 53 Pa.C.S. § 5707(c) is arbitrary and unreasonable and lacks any real and substantial relation to the goal of regulating taxicab service in Philadelphia for the benefit of the public? c. Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law by holding that the issuance of certificates of public convenience to Respondents is akin to the issuance of a license to practice a profession, and therefore, Respondents have a protected property interest in the performance of taxicab operations in Philadelphia? (2) Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law by holding 53 Pa.C.S. § 5707 as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power? a. Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law by holding that the General Assembly has failed to establish any standards that direct, guide or restrain the Authority’s exercise of discretion in formulating its budget and fee schedule or direct the Authority on how costs and expenses should be allocated among utility groups? [532 EAL 2017 and 533 EAL 2017] - 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
