Legal Opinion
Migden-Ostrander v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided August 11, 2004No. Nos. 2003-0316 and 2003-0332PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.
Background
{¶ 1} The Ohio Consumers’ Counsel (“OCC”)1 and the cities of Maumee and Toledo, Ohio, and the Lucas County Board of Commissioners (for ease of reference, the “cities”) appeal as of right from orders of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio issued in a series of commission proceedings filed by Ohio’s six investor-owned electric operating companies2 involving line-extension policies and their implementation.3
{¶ 2} The legal backdrop for these appeals is 1999 Am.Sub.S.B. No. 3, 148 Ohio Laws, Part IV, 7962 (“S.B. 3”), which provides for competition in the supply of electric…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Weiss v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Collinsworth v. Western Electric Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
- Allnet Communications Services, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Tongren v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Ohio Domestic Violence Network v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
3Cited by17 opinions
- Elyria Foundry Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2007
- Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- In re Complaint of ReynoldsburgOhio Supreme Court · 2012
- In re Application of Champaign Wind, L.L.C. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- Industrial Energy Users-Ohio v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2008
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.