Legal Opinion
Matanuska Electric Ass'n v. Chugach Electric Ass'n
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided August 23, 2002No. S-9839PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CARPENETI Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
Retroactive ratemaking by a utility is prohibited in Alaska, as it is in the majority of jurisdictions in the United States. The Regulatory Commission of Alaska compelled Chugach Electric Association to refund payments collected as a result of a miscalculation in the cost of generation and transmission line loss. The superior court, concluding that the commission's ruling constituted retroactive ratemaking, reversed the commission's order. We agree, and therefore affirm the decision of the superior court.
II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
"To comprehend the rule…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Guin v. HaAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
- National Bank of Alaska v. State, Department of RevenueAlaska Supreme Court · 1982
- New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1976
- Northern Alaska Environmental Center v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
- Vest v. First National Bank of FairbanksAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Centerpoint Energy Entex v. Railroad Commission, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2006
- Matanuska Electric Ass'n v. Chugach Electric Ass'nAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
- Garner v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Division of Medical AssistanceAlaska Supreme Court · 2003
- Pyramid Printing Co. v. Alaska State Commission for Human RightsAlaska Supreme Court · 2007
- Amerada Hess Pipeline Corp. v. Regulatory CommissionAlaska Supreme Court · 2008
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.