Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mississippi Rural Water Association, Inc v. Mississippi Public Service Commission

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 2017No. 2015-CC-01249-SCTPublished

1Dissent

KING, JUSTICE,

DISSENTING:

¶ 19. Because I believe that the Mississippi Public Service Commission (MPSC) clearly has the authority to enforce the regulation at issue on the rural water associations, I respectfully dissent. The deposits at issue are not within the statutory definition of “rates.” Furthermore, the Mississippi Rural Water Association’s other arguments that the rule does not apply to its members likewise fail.

1. The rule does not regulate “rates.”

¶20. “In all actions and proceedings arising under the provisions of this article or growing out of the exercise of the authority and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. MS GAMING COM'N v. Imperial Palace of Mississippi, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Lone Star Gas Co. v. Corporation CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
  3. Hoskins v. HowardMississippi Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Health Care & Retirement v. Dept. of HealthDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API