(a) If any public utility or any agent or officer of a public utility, as defined in chapter
1 of this title, shall directly or indirectly, by any device whatsoever, or otherwise,
charge, demand, collect, or receive from any person, firm, or corporation a greater
or less compensation for any service rendered or to be rendered by it, in, or affecting,
or relating to the transportation of persons or property between points within this
state, the distribution of electricity, or the production, transmission, delivery,
or furnishing of heat, or water, or the conveyance of telegraph or telephone messages,
or for any service in connection therewith, than that prescribed in the published
schedules or tariffs then in force or established as provided herein, or than it charges,
demands, collects, or receives from any other person, firm, or corporation for a like
and contemporaneous service, under substantially similar circumstances and conditions,
the public utility shall be guilty of unjust discrimination which is hereby prohibited
and declared to be unlawful and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less
than two hundred dollars ($200) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500) for each
offense; and the agent or officer so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and,
upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than fifty dollars ($50.00) nor more
than five hundred dollars ($500) for each offense.
(b) Nothing in this section or any other provision of the law shall be construed to prohibit
the giving by any public utility of free or reduced-rate service to any elderly person
as defined by the division.
Notes of Decisions
Energy Council v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 773 A.2d 853 (R.I. 2001).
· cites it 6× “G.L. §§ 39-2-2 — 39-2-4 when it approved higher LRS rates for non-residential customers than residential customers for periods after June 1, 2000 without any cost justification.”
In re A & R Marine Corp., 199 A.3d 533 (R.I. 2019).
· cites it 2× “See §§ 39-2-2, 39-2-3, and 39-2-4. The Town is seeking a discounted rate in the instant case that would, at first glance, seem impermissible under the anti-discrimination provisions.”
Rhode Island Consumers' Council v. Smith, 302 A.2d 757 (R.I. 1973).
“Neither can we find any authority for the commission’s order in §§39-2-2, 39-2-3, or 39-2-5, as amended. While those sections generally prohibit preferential treatment to utility customers, they do, by way of exception, authorize the division to permit a utility to offer “free…”
Blackstone Valley Chamber of Com. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 396 A.2d 102 (R.I. 1979).
“We observed: “While those sections generally prohibit preferential treatment to utility customers, they do, by way of exception, authorize the division to permit a utility to offer ‘free or reduced rate service’ to an elderly person.”
Town of Narragansett v. Malachowski, 621 A.2d 190 (R.I. 1993).
“1956 (1990 Reenactment) §§ 39-2-2, 39-2-4, and 39-2-5. Once a utility company proposes a rate increase, it is the function of the commission to determine whether the result to be achieved is a fair and reasonable rate “without unjust discrimination, undue preferences or…”
R.I. Gen. Laws § 39-2-2(a): 1 case
Energy Council v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 773 A.2d 853 (R.I. 2001).
“G.L. §§ 39-2-2 — 39-2-4 when it approved higher LRS rates for non-residential customers than residential customers for periods after June 1, 2000 without any cost justification.”
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.