Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Company, 294 P.2d 378.

69 citing documents.

Sun City Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 556 P.2d 1126 Ariz. 1976
Sun City Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 556 P.2d 1126 Ariz. 1976
Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Co.
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Arizona Public Service Co. 555 P.2d 326 Ariz. 1976
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Arizona Public Service Co. 555 P.2d 326 Ariz. 1976
Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Co.
Sun City Water Co. v. Arizona Corporation Com'n 547 P.2d 1104 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Sun City Water Co. v. Arizona Corporation Com'n 547 P.2d 1104 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
The Company, on the other hand, points out that the Arizona Supreme Court has rejected the reasoning of the Hope case in rate base cases in Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Co.
Morris v. Arizona Corporation Commission 539 P.2d 928 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Morris v. Arizona Corporation Commission 539 P.2d 928 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Co.
City of Tucson v. Citizens Utilities Water Company 498 P.2d 551 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
City of Tucson v. Citizens Utilities Water Company 498 P.2d 551 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
Valley Light & Power Company, , in discussing the trial court’s function in reviewing a Commission’s rate making decision, the Court stated: “ .
Arizona Corporation Commission v. Superior Court 480 P.2d 988 Ariz. 1971
Arizona Corporation Commission v. Superior Court 480 P.2d 988 Ariz. 1971
ulations, and orders, by which such corporations shall be governed in the transaction of business within the State * * In exercising this rate-making power the Commission has a “range of legislative discretion and so long as that discretion is not abused,- the court cannot substitute its judgment as to what is fair value or a just and reasonable rate.” Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Co.
City of Phoenix v. Consolidated Water Company 415 P.2d 866 Ariz. 1966
City of Phoenix v. Consolidated Water Company 415 P.2d 866 Ariz. 1966
in a rate case, we held that the corporation commission must consider both original cost and reproduction cost new depreciated.
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Fred Harvey Transportation Co. 388 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1964
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Fred Harvey Transportation Co. 388 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1964
v. Southern Pacific Co., , ; Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Company, , ; , ; Corporation Commission v. Southern Pac.
ARIZONA CORPORATION COM'N v. Arizona Water Co. 335 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1959
ARIZONA CORPORATION COM'N v. Arizona Water Co. 335 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1959
Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Company, , .
Minneapolis Street Railway Co. v. City of Minneapolis 86 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1957