Legal Opinion · Dissent

Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 10, 1980No. Nos. 80-191 and 80-349Published

1DissentLocher, J.

Since I am of the opinion that the December 12,1979, order of the Public Utilities Commission (“commission”) is unreasonable, unlawful, and unsupported by the evidence adduced at hearings, I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion.

I

A review of the pertinent factual pattern herein is necessary to fully comprehend the situation that this case presents.

On May 23, 1977, the city of Columbus (“city”) enacted Ordinance No. 881-77 for the purpose of setting the rates to be charged for electric service by Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co. (“C&SOE”) to Columbus consumers for the two-year…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. City of Columbus v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Franklin County Welfare Rights Organization v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Masury Water Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Dayton Power & Light Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980

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