Legal Opinion
Franklin County Welfare Rights Organization v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided July 5, 1978No. Nos. 77-1083 and 77-1195PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
I
Celebrezze, J.
In case No. 77-1083, appellant, F.C.W.R.O., presents several propositions of law, the first of which is an assertion that the commission “* * * acted unlawfully and unreasonably in ignoring the language and intent of R . C. 4909.152 concerning the adequacy of service * *
R. C. 4909.152 states, in pertinent part, as follows:
“In fixing the just, reasonable, and compensatory rates * * * to be * * * charged for service by any public utility, the * * * commission may consider the efficiency, sufficiency, and adequacy of the facilities provided and the services rendered by the public…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Bluefield Water Works & Improvement Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Ford Motor Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1977
3Cited by19 opinions
- Ohio Edison Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- Ohio Utilities Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- Babbit v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- Office of Consumers' Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Masury Water Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1979
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.