Legal Opinion
A. Finkl & Sons Co. v. Illinois Commerce Commission
Appellate Court of Illinois
Decided June 8, 1993No. 1-91-3854, 1-91-3869, 1-91-3871 and 1-91-3899PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hartman
This review proceeds under sections 10 — 113 and 10 — 201 of the Public Utilities Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 1112/3, pars. 10 — 113, 10 — 201 (now 220 ILCS 5/10 — 113, 10 — 201 (West 1992)) (section 10— 201) (Act)) and Supreme Court Rule 335 (134 Ill. 2d R. 335), from a final order of the Illinois Commerce Commission (Commission), which allowed Commonwealth Edison (Edison) to recover costs associated with demand-side management (DSM) programs through a rider, designated “Rider 22.” Illinois Industrial Energy Consumers (IIEC) and Citizens Utility Board (CUB) appeal.
The issues presented for…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Business & Professional People for the Public Interest v. Illinois Commerce CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1990
- Business & Professional People for the Public Interest v. Illinois Commerce CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1991
- Illinois Bell Telephone Co. v. Illinois Commerce CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1973
- Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Illinois Commerce CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1953
- City of Chicago v. Illinois Commerce CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1958
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Citizens Utility Board v. Illinois Commerce CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1995
- Pennsylvania Industrial Energy Coalition v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- City of Chicago v. Illinois Commerce CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
- Apple Canyon Lake Property Owners' Ass'n v. Illinois Commerce Comm'nAppellate Court of Illinois · 2013
- Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Illinois Commerce CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 2010
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.