Cases from cite.case.law:

STATE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, v. W. LINDAHL, K. J., 613 So. 2d 63 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . See §§ 367.011(2) and 367.101, Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .

HILL TOP DEVELOPERS, v. HOLIDAY PINES SERVICE CORPORATION,, 478 So. 2d 368 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . This rule, however, implemented section 367.101, Florida Statutes (1981), which related to charges for . . . HPSC because the charges were not given prior approval by the PSC pursuant to sections 367.011(2) and 367.101 . . . As noted above, section 367.101(1) provides for PSC investigation of agreements for service availability . . . are unreasonable, then it may order the utility to refund a portion of the charges to the consumer. § 367.101 . . . proceeding until such time as an order was issued by the PSC, pursuant to its powers conferred by section 367.101 . . . regulate utilities such as the HPSC and to fix charges for service availability. §§ 367.011(2) and 367.101 . . .

FLORIDA WATERWORKS ASSOCIATION, v. FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,, 473 So. 2d 237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . The Commission is given broad authority by section 367.101(1), Florida Statutes (1981), to set by rule . . . The Commission asserts that authority to adopt rule 25-30.58 is found in section 367.101(1), Florida . . . synonymous, the Commission’s power to set standards for CIAC is clearly delegated to it by section 367.101 . . . The statute relied on by the Commission as empowering it to adopt these rules is Section 367.101(1), . . .

CHRISTIAN AND MISSIONARY ALLIANCE FOUNDATION, INC. d b a v. FLORIDA CITIES WATER COMPANY,, 386 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1980)

. . . The financial burden would then be shifted to other customers of the utility contrary to section 367.101 . . . Section 367.101, Florida Statutes (1977), provided the more specific authority for the Commission to . . .

DUVAL UTILITY COMPANY, v. FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PASCO WATER AUTHORITY, INC. v. FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,, 380 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 1980)

. . . utilities applied to the commission for approval of service availability charges pursuant to section 367.101 . . . lacks legal authority to condition the approval of service availability charges, either under section 367.101 . . .

H. MILLER SONS, INC. v. F. HAWKINS, 373 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 1979)

. . . with the following excerpt from that order: We believe the plain and unequivocal mandates of Section - 367.101 . . .

JACKSONVILLE SUBURBAN UTILTIES CORPORATION, 47 Fla. Supp. 73 (Fla. P.S.C. 1977)

. . . That . . . contract dated October 20, 1972, which date is subsequent to the enactment of Section 367.101 . . . The hearing examiner improperly failed to consider the .illegal retroactive application of Section 367.101 . . . To hold otherwise would be contrary to Section 367.101, Florida Statutes, and thus unlawful. . . .