SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, A CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the typewritten provision in the special use permit unambiguously imposed liability on the permittee for damages resulting from the use of the right of way, even without negligence. The court also held that the government's practice of using different permit conditions for privately and publicly owned utilities was not an unconstitutional discrimination.
The United States sued appellant to recover costs for extinguishing a forest fire that originated from appellant's electrical transmission lines withi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Fifth Amendment (Due Process) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
The panel as constituted in the above case has voted to deny the petition for rehearing and to reject the suggestion for a rehearing in banc but to modify the last paragraph of the opinion to read as follows:
“Appellant complains that it was, by the summary action of the District Court, precluded from digging deeper into the nature of the discrimination here involved. At the time of the hearing on motion for summary judgment no showing was made by appellant as to what exploration of the subject might produce beyond establishing the existence of a discriminatory practice. This fact we here accept as conceded. Appellant has thus failed to show a genuine issue for trial. Rule 56(e), Fed.R.Civ.P. Judgment affirmed.”
The full court has been advised of the suggestion for an in banc rehearing and of the proposal of the panel and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the suggestion for rehearing in bane. Fed.R.App.P. 35(b).
The petition for a rehearing is denied. The suggestion for a rehearing in banc is rejected. It is ordered that the last paragraph of the opinion be modified to read as above set forth.
. The Court had earlier noted, 257 U.S. at page 70, 42 S.Ct. at page 25:
“The private corporation, whatever its public duties, is organized for private ends and may be presumed to intend to make whatever profit the business will allow. The municipal corporation is allowed to go into the business only on the theory that thereby the public welfare will be subserved. So far as gain is an object it is a gain to a public body and must be used for public ends. Those who manage the work cannot lawfully make private profit their aim, as the plaintiff’s directors not only may but must.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Springfield GAS & Elec. Co. v. City of Springfield, 257 U.S. 66 (U.S. 1921)