Ohio Water Service Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

The sole issue presented by this appeal is whether the facts of this case fall within our decision in Consumers’ Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1981), 67 Ohio St. 2d 372 [21 O.O.3d 234]. In that case we held that the commission abused its discretion by including in the rate increase post-test period labor costs incurred by a labor contract negotiated after the end of the test year. In its order denying inclusion of the labor cost in the case at bar, the commission relied exclusively on Consumers’ Counsel, supra, suggesting that decision be applied broadly. For the following reasons, we find…