Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 460 / Act 94 of 1923
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 460.351 (2026)

Rehearings; amendment of orders.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

REHEARINGS BY PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION


Act 94 of 1923


460.351 Rehearings; amendment of orders.

Sec. 1.

    The Michigan public utilities commission, in any proceeding which may now be pending before it or which shall hereafter be brought before it, shall have full power and authority to grant rehearings and to alter, amend or modify its findings and orders.

History: 1923, Act 94, Eff. Aug. 30, 1923 ;-- CL 1929, 11081 ;-- CL 1948, 460.351

Compiler's Notes:

    The public utilities commission, referred to in this section, was abolished and its powers and duties transferred to the public service commission by MCL 460.4.

    For transfer of functions relating to the regulation of common carrier railroads from the Public Service Commission to the Department of Transportation, see E.R.O. No. 1982-3, compiled at MCL 247.823 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

TransferOfPowers Notes:

    See MCL 247.823.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1950–2014 · leading case: In re Int'l Transmission Co., 847 N.W.2d 684 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Int'l Transmission Co., 847 N.W.2d 684 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “” MCL 460.351. As discussed earlier, the PSC did not err by acting on the circuit court’s request that it exercise its primary jurisdiction for purposes of clarifying whether the 700-foot deviation in the Thumb Loop Project’s transmission line route fell within the implied…”
Ann Arbor R. v. Michigan Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 91 F. Supp. 668 (E.D. Mich. 1950). · cites it 4× “1948, § 460.351, Mich. Stat.Ann. Sec. 22.111), nor appealed to the courts of the state as it had the right to do.”
Bldg. Owners & Managers Ass'n v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 346 N.W.2d 581 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). “However, defendant commission did have the statutory authority to rehear the present rate case, MCL 460.351; MSA 22.111, and its March 14, 1977, order pursuant thereto merely upheld as reasonable its September 21, 1970, prospective rate in *516 crease order and did not newly…”
Attorney Gen. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 625 N.W.2d 786 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “1 Thus, this case does not present an appropriate vehicle to address the unresolved issue whether MCL 460.351; MSA 22.111, under which the commission has “full power and authority to .”
Attorney Gen. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 575 N.W.2d 302 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). “181, and filed a timely petition for rehearing pursuant to MCL 460.351; MSA 22.111. The Attorney General argued that the PSC’s approval of the Upjohn contract without notice and an opportunity for a contested case hearing violates subsection 6a(l) *152 because the psc left open…”
Great Lakes Steel Div. of Nat'l Steel Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 373 N.W.2d 212 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “” MCL 460.351; MSA 22.111 authorizes the commission to grant rehearings and MCL 460.”
Attorney Gen. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 432 N.W.2d 437 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). “MCL 460.352; MSA 22.112, Attorney General v Public Service Comm, supra, 429 Mich 248.”
City of Lansing v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 48 N.W.2d 133 (Mich. 1951). “CL 1948, § 460.351 (Stat Ann § 22.111) expressly empowers the commission to grant rehearings and thereupon to alter, amend or modify its findings and orders.”
Attorney Gen. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 394 N.W.2d 35 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “The psc is given the authority to grant rehearings in MCL 460.351; MSA 22.111. The procedure for bringing a suit for judicial review of a psc order after denial of rehearing is set forth in MCL 460.”
Attorney Gen. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 414 N.W.2d 687 (Mich. 1987). “[MCL 460.351; MSA 22.111.] Rule 52 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure before the commission provides that a party has thirty days after the final order in which to request a rehearing before the mpsc.”
Atty. Gen. v. Psc, 575 N.W.2d 302 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). “§ 460.351; M.S.A. § 22.111. The Attorney General argued that the PSC's approval of the Upjohn contract without notice and an opportunity for a contested case hearing violates subsection 6a(1) because the PSC left open the possibility of Consumers obtaining an increase in its…”
Atty. Gen. v. Psc, 432 N.W.2d 437 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). “A petition for rehearing postpones the running of the thirty-day appeal period, so that the appeal period does not begin to run until the MPSC has issued its decision on the motion for rehearing.”
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.