U S West Communications, Inc. v. City of Longmont
Supreme Court of Colorado
1DissentJustice Kourlis
Because I view the ordinance as intruding upon matters reserved to the jurisdiction and expertise of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), I respectfully dissent. Tariffs setting utility rates and allocating utility costs have historically been afforded the status of state law. The majority calls that history into question.
A
The regulation of public utilities is a matter of mixed state and local concern. U S West Communications, Inc. v. City of Longmont, 924 P.2d 1071 (Colo.App.1995).
The state-wide component of interest in the regulation of utilities is reflected first in the Colorado…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Maislin Industries, U. S., Inc. v. Primary Steel, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MaxwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. ThornburgSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- City and County of Denver v. StateSupreme Court of Colorado · 1990
- Regional Transportation District v. VossSupreme Court of Colorado · 1995
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.