Legal Opinion
Cities for Fair Utility Rates v. Public Utility Commission
Texas Supreme Court
Decided June 28, 1996No. 94-1237PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHecht, Justice
The principal question in this appeal from an order of the Public Utility Commission is whether an electric utility’s costs of construction work in progress, CWIP, including an allowance for funds used during construction, AFUDC, can be included in its rate base as plant held for future use, PHFU, when construction has halted but the project remains viable. We agree with the PUC, the district court, and the court of appeals, that the answer is yes.
I
We begin by looking at those aspects of utility ratemaking that form the legal setting for the present controversy, including accounting…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- City of El Paso v. Public Utility CommissionTexas Supreme Court · 1994
- Lone Star Gas Co. v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1941
- Public Utility Commission v. GTE-Southwest, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1995
- Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Utility CommissionTexas Supreme Court · 1978
- Cities for Fair Utility Rates v. Public Utility CommissionCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1994
3Cited by37 opinions
- Central Power & Light Co./Cities of Alice v. Public Utility Commission, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2001
- CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC v. Gulf Coast Coalition of Cities, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2008
- Reliant Energy, Inc. v. Public Utility Commission, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2004
- Power Resource Group, Inc. v. Public Utility Commission, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2002
- Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Public Utility Commission of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2003
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.