Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite ARIZONA CORPORATION COM'N v. Arizona Water Co., 335 P.2d 412.

32 citing documents.

Aps v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Aps v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Woodward v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Woodward v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
n his application for rehearing; we address it merely to clarify the meaning of “just and reasonable.” 5 WOODWARD v. ACC Decision of the Court service corporations are “entitled to a fair return on the fair value of [their] propert[y] devoted to the public use,” Ariz. Corp. Comm’n v. Ariz. Water Co., (citations omitted).
Residential Utility Consumer Office v. Arizona Corporation commission/arizona Water Company 377 P.3d 305 Ariz. 2016
Residential Utility Consumer Office v. Arizona Corporation commission/arizona Water Company 377 P.3d 305 Ariz. 2016
Ariz. Corp. Comm’n v. Ariz. Water Co., see supra ¶ 6.
Ruco v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Residential Utility Consumer Office v. Arizona Corp. Commission 355 P.3d 610 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Residential Utility Consumer Office v. Arizona Corp. Commission 355 P.3d 610 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Although our constitution “does not establish a formula for arriving at fair value, it does require such value to be found and used as the base in fixing rates.” Simms, 80 Ariz. at 151 , 294 P.2d at 382 ; see also Ariz. Corp. Comm’n v. Ariz. Water Co., , (“No formula is given for determining fair value ...
Ruco v. Acc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Although our constitution 12 RUCO v. ACC Opinion of the Court “does not establish a formula for arriving at fair value, it does require such value to be found and used as the base in fixing rates.” Simms, 80 Ariz. at 151, 294 P.2d at 382; see also Ariz. Corp. Comm’n v. Ariz. Water Co., (“No formula is given for determining fair value .
US West Communications, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 34 P.3d 351 Ariz. 2001
US West Communications, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 34 P.3d 351 Ariz. 2001
Co., , (same holding); Ariz. Corp. Comm’ (“[T]he Commission must establish the rate base on the basis of fair value and that alone.”).
Arizona Consumers Council v. Arizona Corp. Commission 22 P.3d 905 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Arizona Consumers Council v. Arizona Corp. Commission 22 P.3d 905 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Arizona Corp. Comm’n v. Arizona Water Co.
Residential Utility Consumer Office v. Arizona Corp. Commission 20 P.3d 1169 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Residential Utility Consumer Office v. Arizona Corp. Commission 20 P.3d 1169 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
See Arizona Corp. Comm’n v. Ariz. Water Co., , Simms v. Round Valley Light & Power Co., -55
Litchfield Park Service Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 874 P.2d 988 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Litchfield Park Service Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 874 P.2d 988 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
A utility is entitled to a fair rate of return on the fair value of its property, “no more and no less.” , 190 n. 5, , 1181 n. 5 (App.1978), , see e.g., Public Service Commission of Montana v. Great Northern Utilities Company, 289 U.S. 130, 135 , 53 S.Ct.
Consolidated Water Utilities, Ltd. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 875 P.2d 137 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Consolidated Water Utilities, Ltd. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 875 P.2d 137 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Co., 113 Ariz. at 370, 555 P.2d at 328; Arizona Corp. Comm’n v. Arizona Water Co., , Scates v. Arizona Corp. Comm’n
Cogent Public Service, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 688 P.2d 698 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Cogent Public Service, Inc. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 688 P.2d 698 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
In support of its position
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Citizens Utilities Co. 584 P.2d 1175 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Arizona Corp. Commission v. Citizens Utilities Co. 584 P.2d 1175 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
Under our constitution, a utility is entitled to a fair rate of return on the fair value of its properties, “no more and no less.”
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
we indicated that “a reasonable judgment concerning all relevant factors is required in determining the fair value of the properties at the time of the inquiry.” 85 Ariz. at 201 , 335 P.2d at 414 .
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
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