Hardin-Wyandot Lighting Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
The utility urges that the commission erred in denying its request for valuation and appraisal of all its property used and useful as of a date certain. The prices prepared and unit costs submitted by the utility were as of May 1, 1923. The utility contends vigorously that, because the valuation and appraisal which had been made in a former proceeding was considered in the instant case, namely, an appraisal and valuation made in a proceeding dating from June 20, 1921, based on an average of prices for the five preceding years, instead of upon actual prices at or about May 1, 1923, there was…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Willcox v. Consolidated Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- State ex rel. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Service Commission of MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Standard Oil Co. of NJ v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Columbus Gas & Fuel Co. v. Public Util. Comm'n of OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Wabash Valley Electric Co. v. YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- East Ohio Gas Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1938
- Columbus Gas & Fuel Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1933
- State Ex Rel. City of St. Louis v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1937
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.