Masury Water Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Initially, appellant challenges the nine percent rate of return allowed on its capital structure. Appellant argues that the weight of the testimony submitted with respect to its cost of equity demonstrates that a 14 td 16 percent rate of return was warranted. Appellant avers that the commission erred in accepting a 10 to 12 percent cost of equity calculation, since this recommendation was submitted by commission staff witnesses whose expertise in the field was not as extensive as appellant’s expert.
This court with regard to evidentiary matters does not review a finding and order of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- State v. New Jersey Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1959
- Franklin County Welfare Rights Organization v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- Ford Motor Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1977
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
3Cited by16 opinions
- In re Application of Champaign Wind, L.L.C. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- City of Canton v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1985
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.