Legal Opinion
City of Akron v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided April 7, 1948No. 31247PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.
A single question of law is presented by this appeal: Has the Public Utilities Commission jurisdiction and authority to adopt and promulgate emergency rules and regulations which in effect suspend for a limited period the operation of certain terms of a contract duly entered into by a municipality and a public utility for gas to be furnished to the inhabitants and residents of the municipality?
In the stipulations of fact, the city concedes that the supplemental emergency order of the Public Utilities Commission, issued in a proceeding entitled “In the Matter of the Investigation of the Supply…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Manigault v. SpringsSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Marcus Brown Holding Co. v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Sligh v. KirkwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- East New York Savings Bank v. HahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Nebraska Ex Rel. OmahaSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- Utility Service Partners, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2009
- Kazmaier Supermarket, Inc. v. Toledo Edison Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
- City of Canton v. WhitmanOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- In re Application of Columbus S. Power Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2011
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.