Legal Opinion
In Re the Proposal by Lakedale Telephone Co. to Offer Three Additional Class Services
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided April 1, 1997No. C1-96-2113PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARTIN J. MANSUR, Judge.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) rejected Lakedale Telephone Company’s evidence supporting its proposal to bill customers $.02 per line per month for call tracing service. Instead, the MPUC ordered the company to temporarily charge a $1 per activation fee for the service. We affirm.
FACTS
The legislature has directed the MPUC to determine the terms and conditions under which telephone companies in Minnesota may provide custom local area signaling (CLASS) service. Minn.Stat. § 237.75, subd. 2 (1996). General CLASS service includes call tracing…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Reserve Mining Co. v. HerbstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Markwardt v. State, Water Resources BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Mammenga v. State Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Hibbing Taconite Co. v. Minnesota Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Minneapolis Van & Warehouse Co. v. St. Paul Terminal Warehouse Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Johnson v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Billy Graham Evangelistic Ass'n v. City of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
- In Re the June 9, 2000 Fence Viewing Petition of BaileyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001