Board of Commissioners v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Before this court, appellants’ sole challenge to the commission’s order is the propriety of allowing DP&L to recover the additional expenses for line clearance. Appellants argue that the inclusion of the additional sum violates the test year concepts contained in R.C. 4909.15. In support of its position, appellants rely on Consumers’ Counsel (EOG), supra.
In Consumers’ Counsel (EOG), the commission allowed a post-test-year adjustment to East Ohio Gas for increased labor expenses due to the signing of a new labor contract. Upon appeal, this court reversed. We held that R.C. 4909.15(A) precluded…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- City of Columbus v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
3Cited by10 opinions
- Dayton Power & Light Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Columbus Southern Power Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1993
- City of Columbus v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- Ohio Water Service Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1983
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.