Every public utility shall furnish necessary and adequate service and facilities, and every public utility shall furnish and provide with respect to its business such instrumentalities and facilities, as are adequate and in all respects just and reasonable. All charges made or demanded for any service rendered, or to be rendered, shall be just, reasonable, and not more than the charges allowed by law or by order of the public utilities commission, and no unjust or unreasonable charge shall be made or demanded for, or in connection with, any service, or in excess of that allowed by law or by order of the commission.
State ex rel. Illuminating Co. v. Cuyahoga Cnty. Court of Common Pleas, 97 Ohio St. 3d 69 (Ohio 2002). · cites it 11דIn its commission complaint, AE alleged that by *70 seeking to collect the account arrearage in the common pleas court action, CEI violated R.C. 4905.22 as well as various provisions of the Electric Service and Safety Standards, Ohio Adm.”
State ex rel. Illuminating Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 2002 Ohio 5312 (Ohio 2002). · cites it 11דIn its commission complaint, AE alleged that by seeking to collect the account arrearage in the common pleas court action, CEI violated R.C. 4905.22 as well as various provisions of the Electric Service and Safety Standards, Ohio Adm.”
In re Complaint of Reynoldsburg, 2012 Ohio 5270 (Ohio 2012). · cites it 4ד22 provides: All charges made or demanded for any service rendered, or to be rendered, shall be just, reasonable, and not more than the charges allowed by law or by order of the public utilities commission, and no unjust or unreasonable charge shall be made or demanded for, or…”
Dayton Power & Light Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 447 N.E.2d 733 (Ohio 1983). · cites it 4דFor example, appellant would rely on R.C. 4905.22 to support its contention that Killen expenditures “were incurred in order to provide necessary and adequate service.”
Vill. of Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St. 3d 102 (Ohio 1996). “Ohio Edison argues that it was required to provide service to Design and Rite Aid under the Certified Territory Act and R.C. 4905.22 after they requested service from Ohio Edison.”
Off. of Consumers' Couns. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 70 Ohio St. 3d 244 (Ohio 1994). · cites it 5ד04(B), and the retained applicability of that section under the commission’s alternative regulations, give ratepayers a substantive right to “just and reasonable” rates and a right to fully participate in the ratemaking process to protect their interests. Although OCC states…”
MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 513 N.E.2d 337 (Ohio 1987). · cites it 4דC MCI next advances several arguments to the effect that the February 11, 1986 order was unlawful and unreasonable because the PUCO made unreasonable and discriminatory decisions in violation of R.C 4905.22, 4905.33 and 4905.35. 1 *313 R.”
Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 1996 Ohio 336 (Ohio 1996). “{¶ 22} Ohio Edison argues that it was required to provide service to Design and Rite Aid under the Certified Territory Act and R.C. 4905.22 after they requested service from Ohio Edison.”
State ex rel. Columbia Gas of Ohio, Inc. v. Henson, 102 Ohio St. 3d 349 (Ohio 2004). · cites it 2ד{¶ 16} R.C. 4905.22 specifies that “[ejvery public utility shall furnish necessary and adequate service * * But “ftjhe commission has exclusive jurisdiction over various matters involving public utilities, such as rates and charges, classifications, and service, effectively…”
Kazmaier Supermarket, Inc. v. Toledo Edison Co., 573 N.E.2d 655 (Ohio 1991). · cites it 2דR.C. 4905.22. The General Assembly has by statute pronounced the public policy of the state that the broad and complete control of public utilities shall be within the *151 administrative agency, the Public Utilities Commission.”
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.