Legal Opinion

Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities Commission

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 1984No. 83-616PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue before this court is whether the commission’s treatment of the station connections costs can be modified without reason. For the reasons set forth below, we hold such a modification to be an abuse of discretion and reverse the order of the commission as set forth hereinafter.

It is beyond question that an order of the commission will not be reversed unless it appears from the record that it is manifestly against the weight of the evidence or is so clearly unsupported by the record as to show misapprehension, mistake, or a willful disregard of duty. Delphos v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1940),…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State Ex Rel. Automobile MacHine Co. v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1929
  3. City of Delphos v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1940
  4. City of Cleveland v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  5. City of Columbus v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Ojalvo v. Board of TrusteesOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Ohio Edison Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Ohio Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  5. In re Application of Ohio Power Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014

15 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