In re Pottery In re Pottery

In re Pottery

161 Ohio St. 498, 120 N.E.2d 98, OH.40107(1954)

    • USD 0.99
    • USD 0.99

Descripción editorial

HART, J. The determination of the controversy here involved depends upon the interpretation of certain controlling statutes relating to procedure before the commission. The narrow question at issue may be stated as follows: Was the filing of an application to file a schedule of rates, by the gas company with the commission a ""first filing"" as contemplated by the provisions of Section 614-20, General Code? If it was a ""first filing"" under the statute, then the gas company may charge the pottery companies for industrial gas at rates fixed by the schedule subject to approval by the commission. If, on the other hand, it was not a ""first filing,"" then the order of the commission authorizing the gas company to file a rate schedule should be vacated, and the gas company may secure an increase in industrial gas rates only by complying with the applicable paragraphs of Section 614-20, General Code with respect to an increase of rates, that is, by filing an application for increase of rates, by filing the required exhibits, by computing and fixing a rate base, and in general by carrying out the provisions of such section.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
1954
26 de mayo
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
8
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENDEDOR
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
50.4
KB

Más libros de The Supreme Court of the State of Ohio

Franchise Developers, Inc. v. Cincinnati Franchise Developers, Inc. v. Cincinnati
1987
Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v. Antonelli Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v. Antonelli
1987
Pitts v. Cincinnati Met. Housing Auth. Pitts v. Cincinnati Met. Housing Auth.
1953
State Ex Rel Sanor Sawmill, Inc. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio State Ex Rel Sanor Sawmill, Inc. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio
2004
State v. Doe State v. Doe
2004
State Ex Rel Cranford v. Cleveland State Ex Rel Cranford v. Cleveland
2004