Storey v. Mayo (1968)

Industries, Inc. v. Nichols, 536 So.2d 234 (Fla.1988) (standby rates for qualifying facilities); PW Ventures, Inc. v. Nichols, 533 So.2d 281 (Fla.1988) (third-party sales by qualifying facilities); Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307 (Fla.1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 909 , 89 S.Ct. 1751 , 23 L.Ed.2d 222 (1969) ("The powers of the Commission over ... privately-owned utilities [are] omnipotent within the confines of the statute and the limits of organic law."). 24 We disagree,…

Industries, Inc. v. Nichols, 536 So.2d 234 (Fla.1988) (standby rates for qualifying facilities); PW Ventures, Inc. v. Nichols, 533 So.2d 281 (Fla.1988) (third-party sales by qualifying facilities); Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307 (Fla.1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 909 , 89 S.Ct. 1751 , 23 L.Ed.2d 222 (1969) (“The powers of the Commission over ... privately-owned utilities [are] omnipotent within the confines of the statute and the limits of organic law.”).

We recognize that when the agreement was executed, municipally owned electric utilities were exempt from state agency supervision under section 366.11, Florida Statutes (1967), and that they enjoyed "the privileges of legally protected monopolies within municipal limits." Storey, 217 So.2d at 307 (emphasis added).

Boundaries, Etc., 281 N.W.2d 65, 72 (S.D.1979), quoting Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307-308 (Fla.1968) ], it is inaccurate to view a request for service by a potential electric customer from an electric supplier as forming a "consensual relationship" similar to that which occurs in other commercial contexts.

MDU relies on language from Willrodt v. Northivestem Public Service Co., where we stated that “[a]n individual has no organic, economic, or political right to service by a particular utility merely because he deems it advantageous to himself.” 281 N.W.2d 65 , 72 (S.D.1979) (quoting Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307-08 (Fla.1968)). [¶ 9.] FEM agrees that the Act was adopted with the intent to avert wasteful spending. ,It contends, however, that a plain reading of SDCL 49-34A…

Indeed, in effect, today this Court allows an abrogation of the principle that an individual customer "has no organic, economic or political right to service by a particular utility merely because he deems it advantageous to himself." Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307-08 (Fla.1968); see also Lee County Elec.

See § 366.11, Fla. Stat. (2002); Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307 (Fla.1968).

We addressed a similar argument in Willrodt v. Northwestern Public Service Co., 281 N.W.2d 65, 72 (S.D.1979), wherein we stated: “ ‘An individual has no organic, economic or political right to service by a particular utility merely because he deems it advantageous to himself.’ ” (Quoting Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307-8 (Fla.1968)).

As was stated in Lee County Electric Coop. v. Marks, 501 So.2d 585, 587 (Fla.1987), “ ‘an individual has no organic, economic or political right to service by a particular utility merely because he deems it advantageous to himself.’ Larger policies are at stake than one customer’s self-interest, and those policies must be enforced and safeguarded by the [Public Utilities Commission].” (quoting Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307-08 (Fla.1968), ce rt. denied, 395 U.S. 909 , 89…

See Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307 (Fla.1968) (noting that "the powers of the Commission over these privately-owned utilities is omnipotent within the confines of [Chapter 366] and the limits of organic law), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 909 , 89 S.Ct. 1751 , 23 L.Ed.2d 222 (1969); City Gas Co. v. Peoples Gas System, Inc., 182 So.2d 429, 435 (Fla.1965) (Chapter 366 of Florida Statutes "add up to what can be considered a very extensive authority over the fortunes and operation …

See Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, 307 (Fla.1968) (noting that “the powers of the Commission over these privately-owned utilities is omnipotent within the confines of [Chapter 366] and the limits of organic law), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 909 , 89 S.Ct. 1751 , 23 L.Ed.2d 222 (1969); City Gas Co. v. Peoples Gas System, Inc., 182 So.2d *612 429, 435 (Fla.1965) (Chapter 366 of Florida Statutes “add up to what can be considered a very extensive authority over the fortunes and opera…

See generally Storey v. Mayo , 217 So.2d 304 , 307-08 (Fla. 1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 909 (1969) (stating that a consumer of electricity has "no organic, economic or political right to service by a particular utility merely because he deems it advantageous to himself").

See, e.g., Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304 (Fla.1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 909 , 89 S.Ct. 1751 , 23 L.Ed.2d 222 (1969); Peoples Gas System v. Mason, 187 So.2d 335 (Fla.1966).

See Storey v. Mayo, 217 So.2d 304, at 307 (Fla. 1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 909 , 23 L.Ed.2d 222 , 89 S.Ct. 1751 (1969).