Legal Opinion
City of Columbus v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 5, 1992No. 90-1575PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
Columbus claims that the commission acted unlawfully by failing to follow R.C. 4909.34, 4909.38, 4909.39 and 4909.15. We agree and reverse in part and remand.
In PUCO No. 84-67-GA-AIR, the commission fixed Columbia’s rates on a regional basis finding regional rates to be preferable to Columbia’s historic rate-making policy, which involved negotiating ordinance contracts with the numerous individual municipalities within Columbia’s entire service territory. *432However, in PUCO Nos. 88-716-GA-AIR et seq. (“1988 Columbia rate cases”), the commission rejected this regional rate-making as being…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- City of Columbus v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- Franklin County Welfare Rights Organization v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Townships of Mahoning County v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- City of Norwalk v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ohio Edison Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
- Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- In re Application of Suburban Natural Gas Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2021
- Cleveland Elec. Illum. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
- Ohio Edison Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1997