Legal Opinion
Pacific Bell v. Public Utilities Commission
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 23, 2000No. A087250PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HANING, J.
This petition for writ of review, one of the first presented to the Court of Appeal under jurisdiction recently established by Public Utilities Code section 1756,1 raises an important issue of appellate procedure. Where the Legislature has authorized a writ of review as the exclusive method of challenging a Public Utilities Commission (PUC or commission) decision, must the Court of Appeal grant the writ, examine the PUC’s certified record, provide oral argument, and decide the matter by written opinion each time an applicant presents a procedurally proper writ petition? We…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Conroy v. AniskoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Consumers Lobby Against Monopolies v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Tex-Cal Land Management, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- In Re Rose VCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- Wood v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Southern California Edison Co. v. PeeveyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- PG&E Corp. v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Southern California Edison Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Utility Reform Network v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Pacific Bell Wireless, LLC v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.