Time Warner AxS v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.
Appellants propound a total of six propositions of law arguing that the commission abused its discretion when it adopted the partial stipulation and proposed alternative regulation plan. Each party also briefed the issue that we raised sua sponte: whether the commission exceeded its statutory authority particularly when it used non-traditional rate-setting methods under R.C. 4927.04(A) to set Ameritech’s rates. The commission contends that appellants waived this issue by not raising it below. We disagree. Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived. See, e.g., Gates Mills Invest. Co. v.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Provident Bank v. WoodOhio Supreme Court · 1973
- Wachendorf v. ShaverOhio Supreme Court · 1948
- MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Armco, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- Burger Brewing Co. v. ThomasOhio Supreme Court · 1975
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Ohio Edison Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- AT&T Communications of Ohio, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Cleveland Elec. Illum. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
- In the Matter of Burton S.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1999
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.