Summary of CPUC Appellate Review Decisions

regulatory law

| Communications | Energy | Water | Transport | Climate | Appellate Review
| | Review of CPUC Decisions | Overview of Case Law Re: Section 1759 of CPUC code

T 415.392.7900
F 415.398.4321

505 Sansome Street
Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94111

Link to Abridged Summary Regarding Appellate Review of CPUC Decisions:

Abridged Summary of California Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Orders
Reviewing Decisions of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC),Thomas J. MacBride, Jr., Revised March 3, 2011

Summaries of Selected Cases:

1. Utility Consumers’ Action Network,187 Cal. App. 4^th 668; 2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1443 (August 17, 2010)

2. The Utility Reform Network,166 Cal. App. 4^th 522, 2008 Cal. PUC LEXIS 1376 (August 29, 2008)

3. Southern California Edison,140 Cal. App. 4^th 1085, 2006 Cal. PUC LEXIS 948 (June 26, 2006)

4. Pacific Bell Wireless,140 Cal. App. 4^th 718, 2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 905 (June 20, 2006)

5. Southern California Edison,128 Cal. App. 4^th 1, 2005 Cal. PUC LEXIS 520 (April 4, 2005)

6. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority,124 Cal. App. 4^th 346, 2004 Cal. PUC LEXIS 1973 (Nov. 22, 2004)

7. Southern California Edison (CEERT),121 Cal. App. 4^th 1303, 2004 Cal. PUC LEXIS 1449 (August 31, 2004)

8. Utility Consumers’ Action Network,120 Cal. App. 4^th 644 (July 12, 2004), 2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1102

9. City of St. Helena,119 Cal. App. 4^th 793 (June 21, 2004), 14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 713, 2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 970

10. PG&E Corporation,118 Cal. App. 4^th 1174 (May 21, 2004), 13 Cal., Rptr. 3d 630, 2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 785

11. Southern California Edison,117 Cal. App. 4^th 1039 (2004), 12 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441, 2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 568

12. North Shuttle,67 Cal. App. 4^th 386 (1998), 79 Cal. Rptr. 2d 46

13. Assembly of the State of California,12 Cal. 4^th 87 (1995), 48 Cal. Rptr. 2d 54

14. Camp Meeker Water System,51 Cal. 3d 845 (1990), 799 P.2d 758

15. Napa Valley Wine Train,50 Cal. 3d 370 (1990), 787 P.2d 976

16. Southern California Gas Company,50 Cal. 3d 31 (1990), 784 P.2d 1373

17. Toward Utility Rate Normalization,44 Cal. 3d 870 (1988), 750 P.2d 787

18. City and County of San Francisco,39 Cal. 3d 523 (1985), 703 P.2d 381

19. Southern California Gas Company,Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. and PG&E, 38 Cal. 3d 64 (1985), 695 P.2d 186

20. General Telephone Company of California,34 Cal. 3d 817 (1983), 670 P.2d 349

21. Kenneth Cory, State Controller,33 Cal. 3d 522 (1983), 658 P.2d 749

22. United States Steel Corporation,29 Cal. 3d 603 (1981), 629 P.2d 1381

23. County of Inyo,26 Cal. 3d 154 (1980), 604 P.2d 566

24. Consumers’ Lobby Against Monopolies (“CLAM”), Towards Utility Rate Normalization,25 Cal. 3d 891 (1979), 603 P.2d 41