Legal Opinion
Southern California Edison Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 26, 2006No. B183435PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CROSKEY, Acting P. J.
Southern California Edison Company (Edison) challenges a decision by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that certain public utilities must require the payment of prevailing wages to workers on energy utility construction projects. Edison contends (1) the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) (29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq.) preempts the decision; (2) the PUC committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion by violating its own procedural rules concerning the scope of issues addressed in the rulemaking proceeding; (3) the PUC provided no meaningful opportunity to respond to…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. CoyneSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement v. Dillingham Construction, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Farmer v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 25Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- California Grocers Assn. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- Utility Consumers' Action Network v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Utility Reform Network v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Purifoy v. HowellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Pegastaff v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.