Laserfiche WebLink
Vero Beach Mediation Statement-Attachment E <br /> Storey v.Mayo,77 P.U.R.3d 411(1968) <br /> 217 So.2d 304 <br /> within confines of statute and limits of organic -WW <br /> 77 P.U.R3d 411 law.F.S.A.§366.01 et seq. <br /> Supreme Court of Florida. 5 Cases that cite this headnote <br /> Mrs.John De Raismes STOREY,Mr.and Mrs. <br /> Richard Conley,Mr.and Mrs.George Fichter, [31 Public Utilities <br /> Dr.P.M.Boyd,Jr.,et ux.,et al.,Petitioners, Certificates,Permits,and Franchises <br /> V. Power to mandate efficient and effective utility <br /> William T.MAYO,Chairman,and Edwin L. in public interest necessitates correlative power <br /> Mason,and Jerry W.Carter,Commissioners, to protect utility against unnecessary,expensive <br /> as and constituting the Florida Public competitive practices.F.S.A.§366.01 et seq. <br /> Service Commission,Respondents. Cayes that cite this headnote <br /> No.372o3. I Nov.6,1968. <br /> Rehearing Denied Dec.12,x.968. [41 Public Utilities <br /> fey- Service and Facilities <br /> Certiorari proceeding by consumers to review order ofPublic Individual has no organic,economic or political <br /> Service Commission which approved a territorial service <br /> right to service by particular utility merely <br /> agreement between a privately owned electric utility and a because he deems it advantageous to himself. <br /> municipal electric utility. The Supreme Court, Thomal, J., <br /> held that territorial service agreement entered into to avoid 7 Cases that cite this headnote <br /> overlapping service and expensive competitive activity was <br /> not invalid as being in restraint of trade,contrary to public <br /> interest,or violative of equal protection. [51 Constitutional Law <br /> 4r- Carriers and Public Utilities; Railroads <br /> Petition denied. Electricity <br /> 0- Service Areas; Competition <br /> Caldwell,C.J,and Ervin,J.,dissented. Individuals who protested tentorial service <br /> agreement between two electric utilities which <br /> was entered into to avoid overlapping service, <br /> West Headnotes(10) <br /> and which required them to take electrical <br /> service from unregulated municipal utility rather <br /> than from regulated private utility,from which <br /> [1] Electricity they had been receiving service,were not denied <br /> — Regulation in General; Statutes and equal protection,since they occupied same status <br /> Ordinances as all users of power from municipal utility. <br /> Powers of Public Service Commission to Cases that cite this headnote <br /> regulate privately owned electric utilities are <br /> exclusive and,therefore,necessarily broad and <br /> comprehensive.F.S.A.§§366.03,366.05. [6] Electricity <br /> e-- Regulation of Supply and Use <br /> 4 Cases that cite this headnote Electricity <br /> h Judicial Review and Enforcement <br /> [2] Electricity In event of excessive rates or inadequate <br /> Regulation in General; Statutes and service by municipal electric utility that <br /> Ordinances assumed function from privately owned utility <br /> Power of Public Service Commission over of supplying electricity to certain individuals, <br /> privately owned electric utilities is omnipotent <br /> ©2014`fhomson Reuters.No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 <br />