Globe Metallurgical Division of Interlake, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The question is whether the commission’s company-wide rate increase allowance for Ohio Power is unreasonable or unlawful as applied to the class of inter-ruptible power customers.
Appellants, as users of interruptible power, do not attack the propriety of the overall rate increase. They contend, however, that the increase, as applied to their classification, is improper without evidence relative to the cost to Ohio Power of furnishing such service. Although appellants imply that such cost is minimal, inasmuch as Ohio Power must maintain a power reserve in order to meet the fluctuating demand…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Midwest Gas Users Ass'n v. State Corporation CommissionCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1979
- At&T Communications of Ohio, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- General Motors Corp. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- City of Cleveland v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Florida Retail Federation, Inc. v. MayoSupreme Court of Florida · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.