Legal Opinion

Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 2006No. Nos. 2005-1621 and 2005-1679PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, J.

{¶ 1} In these two consolidated public-utility cases, the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel is challenging recent orders by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (“PUCO”) that allowed FirstEnergy Corporation’s three subsidiary electric companies — the Ohio Edison Company, the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, and the Toledo Edison Company (collectively, “FirstEnergy”), as well as the Dayton Power and Light Company — to change their accounting procedures in a way that could lead to future rate increases for the companies’ customers. According to the Consumers’ Counsel, the PUCO’s action — even…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. New York v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  2. State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga County BoardOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Midwest Iso Transmission Owners v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Service Commission of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, IntervenorsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2004
  5. Monongahela Power Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2004

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Merrill v. Ohio Department of Natural ResourcesOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  2. In re Application of Columbus S. Power Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Elyria Foundry Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  4. In re Application of Ohio Power Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  5. In re Application of Ohio Edison Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API