Legal Opinion

Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1979No. 78-1238PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Per curiam

The threshold question posed for resolution in this cause is whether the determination of the commission, which found Unit No. 1 of the Davis-Besse nuclear generating facility used and useful, as of the date certain, in rendering the utility service for which rates are to be charged, was unlawful or unreasonable. R. C. 4903.13.

Appellant contends that the commission improperly included Unit No. 1 in the valuation of Toledo Edison’s rate base when the evidence demonstrates that the unit, as of the date certain, was not "‘used or useful” in providing service to the jurisdictional ratepayers of…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. St. Joseph Stock Yards Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Columbus Gas & Fuel Co. v. Public Util. Comm'n of OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Denver Union Stock Yard Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  4. In Re New England Tel. & Tel. Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1949
  5. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1975

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Dayton Power & Light Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Ohio Edison Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. City of Cleveland v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Industrial Energy Users-Ohio v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2008

11 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