Legal Opinion
Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided May 5, 1976No. Nos. 75-740 and 75-741PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
• Stern, J.
In Gene Slagle, Inc., v. Pub. Util. Comm., supra, at page 46, it was held that when an order of the commission changing utility rates has been reversed by this court for failing to adequately set forth the reasons prompting the decision, “the increased rates pursuant to such order could no longer be lawfully charged, and those fates in effect prior to the above order were reinstated by operation of law, and continued in effect until further order of the commission.” The utility raises two issues in this case: whether Slagle applies to this court’s decision in Cleveland Elec.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Ford Motor Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- So. Bell T. T. Co. v. Georgia Pub. Ser. Comm.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1948
- Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Georgia Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Georgia · 1948
- Superior Metal Products, Inc. v. Administrator, Ohio Bureau of Employment ServicesOhio Supreme Court · 1975
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Monongahela Power Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- At&T Communications of Ohio, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- In re Application of Columbus S. Power Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
- In re Complaint of ReynoldsburgOhio Supreme Court · 2012
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.