Opinion

Toledo Edison Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

  • 5 Ohio St. 3d 95
  • 5 Ohio B. 175
  • 449 N.E.2d 428
  • 1983 Ohio LEXIS 714
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
May 19, 1983
Status
Published
On the bench
Brown, Celebrezze, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 75.3%

The opinion

Per Curiam.

“An appeal from the Public Utilities Commission to the Supreme Court is predicated upon the finality of the order. * * *” Hall China Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 206, 209 [ 4 O.O.3d 390 ]. In Hall China, we held that a commission order is not final and appealable where the matter is still pending before the commission on rehearing. Id. at 210 . To hold otherwise would be inconsistent with this court’s repeatedly pronounced disfavor of piecemeal appeals. See Ashtabula v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1942), 139 Ohio St. 213 [ 22 O.O. 11 ]; Co-operative Legislative Comm. of Transp. Brotherhoods v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1948), 150 Ohio St. 277 [ 37 O.O. 501 ]; and Canton v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1963), 174 Ohio St. 373 [ 22 O.O.2d 422 ].

The appeal herein, having been taken from a non-final order, is hereby sua sponte dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Celebrezze, C.J., W. Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and J.P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.