Legal Opinion
Powell v. Colorado Public Utilities Commission
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided April 27, 1998No. 97SA75PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Kourlis
Crosby Powell, Donzell Rosenberg, Michael Townes, Betty Lou Townes and other inmates in the Colorado Department of Corrections (collectively referred to as Powell) appeal from a judgment of the district court affirming orders of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC). This court has direct appellate jurisdiction under section 40-6-115(5), 11 C.R.S. (1997). Powell essentially argues that the inmate telephone system provided by Sprint Communications Company L.P. (Sprint) and implemented by the Department of Corrections (DOC) violates public utilities law by overcharging for inmate…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Ramos v. LammCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1980
- Union Rural Electric Ass'n v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1983
- Lucero v. Climax Molybdenum Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1987
- Computer and Communications Industry Association v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, North American Telephone Association, Utilities Telecommunications Council, Tymnet, Inc., Continental Telephone Corporation, Xerox Corporation, Hazeltine Corporation, Alarm Industry Telecommunications Committee of the National Burglar & Fire Alarm Association, Rca Global Communications, Inc., Satellite Business Systems, Motorola, Inc., U.S. Telephone & Telegraph Corporation, American Petroleum Institute, Citicorp, Central Telephone & Utilities Corporation, Comsat General Corporation, American Newspaper Publishers Association, Gte Service Corporation, Sperry Univac Division of Sperry Corporation, Communications Satellite Corporation, International Business MacHines Corporation, American Telephone & Telegraph Company, Computer & Business Equipment Manufacturers Association, Control Data Corporation, United Telephone System, Inc., United Computing Systems, Inc., Southern Pacific Communications Company, Western Union Telegraph Company, Aeronautical Radio, Inc., Isa Communications Services, Inc., Independent Data Communications Manufacturers Association, Inc., Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc., Bunker Ramo Corporation, Gte Telenet Communications Corporation, Municipality of Anchorage D/B/A Anchorage Telephone Utility, Louisiana Public Service Commission, Intervenors. The People of the State of California and the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, International Business MacHines Corp., Intervenors. Independent Data Communications Manufacturers Association, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, International Business MacHines Corp., Intervenors. National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, International Business MacHines Corp., Intervenors. American Newspaper Publishers Association v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, International Business MacHines Corp., Intervenors. Motorola, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, International Business MacHines Corp., IntervenorsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Board of County Commissioners of the County of San Miguel v. Colorado Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 2007
- Colorado Office of Consumer Counsel v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
- Eddie's Leaf Spring Shop & Towing, LLC v. Colorado Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 2009
- Trans Shuttle, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 2004
- Public Service Co. v. Trigen-Nations Energy Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1999
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.