# United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Louisiana Public Service Commission

> Supreme Court of Louisiana · May 29, 1961 · 241 La. 687

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9669565

## Case

- **Full name:** United Gas Pipe Line Company v. Louisiana Public Service Commission
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Louisiana
- **Decided:** May 29, 1961
- **Citations:** 241 La. 687; 130 So. 2d 652; 1961 La. LEXIS 586
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Fournet
- **Judges:** McCaleb, Fournet
- **Cited by:** 25 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9669565

## Opinion text

FOURNET, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
I am in full accord with the views expressed by Mr. Justice McCALEB in the separate opinion in which he dissents in part, and which is to the effect that we should not depart from the settled jurisprudence of this court — and, indeed, from the law universally obtaining. — that a public utility company is entitled to a fair and reasonable return on its investment, and to the further effect that in determining what are just and reasonable rates in so far as such utilities are concerned, one of the most important factors to be considered, as pointed out in Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co., 320 U.S. 591 , 64 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed. 333 , is that these rates “should be commensurate with returns on investments in other enterprises having corresponding risks.”
While it is my opinion that the Commission in this particular case was possessed of sufficient information and evidence to support its order increasing the rates to insure that the plaintiff would realize a just and a reasonable return on its investment, it is my view that in arriving at these rates the Commission lacked the necessary evidence to support the lesser differential it authorized in the levying of rates for gas sold to domestic consumers and that sold to industrial consumers — historically approximately 5‡ per MCF — and, for this reason, I believe the case should be remanded to the Commission for further consideration and action in this particular respect.
I must, therefore, respectfully dissent from the majority decision.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9669565. Public record. Not legal advice.