Ohio Power Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPaul W. Brown, J.
R. C. 4909.191(E) does not direct that an order issued pursuant to that section is void, voidable or subject to invalidation if tardily issued. Absent clear legislative language indicating that compliance with the statute’s mandate of timeliness is a condition precedent to validity, we conclude that that requirement is not so essential, that' it. overrides the basic purpose of the legislation which .is to regulate fuel adjustment clauses in the public interest.
We reject appellant’s argument that its .overall urn der recovery of fuel costs incurred during the audit "peri iod is .material to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- City of Akron v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1966
- City of Cleveland v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1965
3Cited by19 opinions
- Daily Advertiser v. TRANS-LA, ETC.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
- Centerpoint Energy Entex v. Railroad Commission, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2006
- Montgomery County Board of Commissioners v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- Industrial Energy Consumers of Ohio Power Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Fitchburg Gas & Electric Light Co. v. Department of Telecommunications & EnergyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2004
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.