Opinion ID: 1861598
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: White v Detroit Edison

Text: Plaintiff sought damages for trespass by CATV and for an accounting from Detroit Edison for all monies paid to it by CATV for the use of the poles in question. These claims were based on the theory that CATV had no right to utilize property designated as a public utility easement and that it had trespassed on plaintiff's property by stringing aerial wires from poles owned by Detroit Edison which were implanted in land designated as a public utility easement pursuant to the Subdivision Control Act of 1967, MCL 560.101 et seq.; MSA 26.430(101) et seq. The trial court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment holding that cable television is a public utility as that term is defined and applied in MCL 560.102 (l); MSA 26.430(102) (l) and that CATV was entitled to use the poles under contract with Detroit Edison. The Court of Appeals affirmed and plaintiff applied for leave to appeal. Leave to appeal was granted and appeal limited to the issue of whether a cable television system is a public utility within the meaning of the Subdivision Control Act of 1967. We affirm.
MCL 560.102 (l); MSA 26.430(102) (l) defines a public utility: `Public utility' means all persons, firms, corporations, copartnerships or municipal or other public authority providing gas, electricity, water, steam, telephone, sewer or other services of a similar nature. Cable television is not one of the services listed in subdivision (l). Therefore, it can be a public utility for the purposes of the Subdivision Control Act only if it is an other service of a similar nature to one of those listed in the act. In interpreting this provision, this Court's duty is to construe it in such a manner as to carry out the intention of the Legislature. The most basic requirement of legislative intent requires that the words be read in light of the general purposes sought to be accomplished, General Motors Corp v Erves, supra. Some of the purposes underlying the Subdivision Control Act and listed in its preamble include: to further the orderly layout and use of land and to provide for proper ingress and egress to lots, 1967 PA 288. The statute in question defines services which require the laying of pipes, implanting of poles and stringing of wires. The key to resolving whether cable television is a public utility within the meaning of the act is the word similar. A generally accepted definition of the word similar is stated in Fletcher v Interstate Chemical Co, 94 NJL 332, 334; 110 A 709 (1920), see also 17 ALR 94: The word `similar' is generally interpreted to mean that one thing has a resemblance in many respects, nearly corresponds, is somewhat like, or has a general likeness, to some other thing, and not to mean identical in form and substance, although in some cases `similar' may mean `identical' or `exactly alike'. This interpretation has been adopted in Michigan. See Thomas v Consumers Power Co, 58 Mich App 486, 494; 228 NW2d 786 (1975), rev'd on other grounds, 394 Mich 459; 231 NW2d 653 (1975). Of the services mentioned in subdivision (l), cable television has the greatest similarity to telephone service. In the instant case, we need not address the issue of whether cable television service is the same as telephone service. Instead, we consider whether cable television is a similar service for purposes of carrying out the objectives of the statute. Certainly differences do exist between the services offered by cable television and telephones. Telephone service usually provides for the two-way transmission of articulate speech between any two or more terminal points in the system. Cable television, in its present state of technological development and implementation, does not currently provide these services. However, cable television service does have informative and communicative aspects and potentials. Also, the medium used to transmit these services is very similar to that used in providing telephone service. It is for these reasons that cable television has been analogized to telephone service. In Re New York Telephone Co, 34 PUR3d 115 (NY PSC, 1960), the commission stated:  It is quite apparent that principles common to telephony and telegraphy, i.e., transmission of intelligence via electrical impulse, will be employed in the transmission of television signals and associated audio signals over the channels to be provided by the telephone company.