Legal Opinion
Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided September 5, 2007No. 2006-0788PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.
{¶ 1} This is an appeal as of right by appellant, Ohio Consumers’ Counsel (“OCC”), from an order of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (“commission” or “PUCO”) in PUCO No. 05-276-EL-AIR. The commission’s order approved a stipulation signed by intervening appellee Dayton Power & Light Company (“DP&L”), Cargill, Inc., Honda of America Mfg., Inc., and intervening appellee Industrial Energy Users-Ohio.
Background
{¶ 2} The backdrop for this appeal is Am.Sub.S.B. No. 3, 148 Ohio Laws, Part IV, 7962 (“SB 3”), effective October 5, 1999, which provided for restructuring Ohio’s electric-utility…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1985
- Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- City of Akron v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- AK Steel Corp. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- In re Application of Columbus S. Power Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2011
- In re Complaints of Lycourt-Donovan v. Columbia Gas of Ohio, Inc. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017
- Industrial Energy Users-Ohio v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- In re Application of E. Ohio Gas Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2023
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.