Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 61-612

Complaint against utility. 

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Complaint against utility. 

Complaint may be made by the commission of its own motion or by any corporation or person, chamber of commerce, board of trade, or any civic, commercial, mercantile, traffic, agricultural or manufacturing association or organization or any body politic or municipal corporation, by petition or complaint in writing, setting forth any act or thing done or omitted to be done by any public utility including any rule, regulation or charge heretofore established or fixed by or for any public utility, in violation, or claimed to be in violation of any provision of law or of any order or rule of the commission: provided, that no complaint shall be entertained by the commission, except upon its own motion, as to the reasonableness of any rate or charges of any gas, electrical, water or telephone corporation, unless the same be signed by the mayor or the president or chairman of the board of trustees or a majority of the council, commission or other legislative body of the city or county or city or town, if any, within which the alleged violation occurred, or not less than 25 consumers or purchasers or prospective consumers or purchasers of such gas, electricity, water or telephone service.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1956–2014 · leading case: Washington Water Power Co. v. Kootenai Environmental Alliance
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Washington Water Power Co. v. Kootenai Environmental Alliance (1979) idaho · cites it 6× “The Complaint failed to state a claim under Idaho Code § 61-612 ; and WWP’s Motion to Dismiss should have been granted.”
Afton Energy, Inc. v. Idaho Power Co. (1984) idaho · cites it 4× “§ 61-129 declares that public utilities are subject to "the jurisdiction, control and regulation of the Commission"; I.C. § 61-612 gives the Commission jurisdiction to hear complaints against utilities alleging violations of rules, regulations or of any provision of law; I.”
Empire Lumber Co. v. Washington Water Power Co. (1988) idaho · cites it 4× “I.C. § 61-612. See, Afton Energy Inc. v. Idaho Power Company, 111 Idaho 925 , 729 P.”
Utah-Idaho Sugar Co. v. Intermountain Gas Co. (1979) idaho · cites it 2× “The Commission held that U & I was barred by I.C. § 61-612 4 from challenging the reasonableness of Schedule LV-1; that U & I’s claim that Intermountain’s proposal of Schedule LV-1 was invalid because of the failure by Inter-mountain to comply with the requirements of I.”
Rosebud Enterprises, Inc. v. Idaho Public Utilities Commission (1996) idaho · cites it 2× “IPUC’s standards and requirements for implementation of PURPA are set out in its body of decisions arising from generic, rate-setting, and complaint actions.”
AW Brown Co., Inc. v. Idaho Power Co. (1992) idaho · cites it 2× “I.C. § 61-612. See, Afton Energy Inc. v. Idaho Power Company, 111 Idaho 925 , 729 P.”
Clearwater Power Co. v. Washington Water Power Co. (1956) idaho “Appellants cite § 61-612, I.C., which in substance provides that any corporation or person may make complaint to the commission of any act of a public utility which the complainant claims to be a violation of law or of some order or rule of the commission.”
Idaho Power Co. v. New Energy Two, LLC (2014) idaho · cites it 4× “I.C. § 61-612. See, Afton Energy Inc. v. Idaho Power Company, 111 Idaho 925 , 729 P.”
Idaho Power v. New Energy Two & IPUC (2014) idaho · cites it 2× “As the Idaho Supreme Court noted in Afton I/III, Section 61-612 “gives the Commission jurisdiction to hear complaints against public utilities alleging violations of rules, regulations or any provision of laws; I.”
Idaho Power v. New Energy Two & IPUC (2014) idaho · cites it 2× “As the Idaho Supreme Court noted in Afton I/III, Section 61-612 “gives the Commission jurisdiction to hear complaints against public utilities alleging violations of rules, regulations or any provision of laws; I.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.