Lucas County Commissioners v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Moyer, C J.
In reviewing motions to dismiss brought under R.C. 4905.26, the commission has adopted the same standard used by courts in a civil case and deems all of the complainants’ factual allegations to be true. In re Toledo Premium, Yogurt v. Toledo Edison Co. (Sept. 17, 1992), case No. 91-1528-EL-CSS, cited in Cleveland Elec. Ilium. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 521, 524, 668 N.E.2d 889, 891. Moreover, in reviewing commission dismissals for failure to state a claim, we also assume the allegations of the complaint to be true. In this review, we therefore accept the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Ohio Utilities Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- Time Warner AxS v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Columbus Southern Power Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1993
3Cited by12 opinions
- In re Application of Columbus S. Power Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2011
- In re Application of Columbus S. Power Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
- Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2009
- In re Application of Ohio Power Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
- Green Cove Resort I Owners' Ass'n v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.