Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Application of Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc., 377 P.2d 309.

30 citing documents.

Sun City Home Owners Association v. Acc Ariz. 2021
Sun City Home Owners Association v. Acc Ariz. 2021
Johnson Utilities LLC v. Arizona Corporation Ariz. 2020
Johnson Utilities LLC v. Arizona Corporation Ariz. 2020
Co-op, Inc., v. Senner, –81, 385 (1962).
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Elec. Power Co-Op., Inc. 83 P.3d 573 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Elec. Power Co-Op., Inc. 83 P.3d 573 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Coop., Inc., -81 , (holding State, by issuing CC & N, "in effect contracts" that if public service corporations makes adequate investment and renders competent service, it will have monopoly).
US West Communications v. Arizona Corp. Com'n 3 P.3d 936 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
US West Communications v. Arizona Corp. Com'n 3 P.3d 936 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Mohave Disposal, Inc. v. City of Kingman 909 P.2d 435 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Mohave Disposal, Inc. v. City of Kingman 909 P.2d 435 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Tonto Creek Estates Homeowners Ass'n v. Arizona Corp. Commission 864 P.2d 1081 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Tonto Creek Estates Homeowners Ass'n v. Arizona Corp. Commission 864 P.2d 1081 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 845 P.2d 1125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 845 P.2d 1125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Inc., , (Commission exceeded its jurisdiction by expanding Tucson Electric’s service area in absence of a hearing).
James P. Paul Water Co. v. ARIZ. CORP. COM'N 671 P.2d 404 Ariz. 1983
James P. Paul Water Co. v. ARIZ. CORP. COM'N 671 P.2d 404 Ariz. 1983
We granted Pinnacle's petition for review in order to supplement the Court of Appeal's discussion of Application of Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc.
James P. Paul Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 671 P.2d 410 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
James P. Paul Water Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 671 P.2d 410 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
This issue appears to have been fully answered in Application of Trico Electric Cooperative Inc., , *435 (1962).
Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 644 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 644 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
For example, in Application of Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc., , the court stated: In the performance of its duties with respect to public service corporations the Commission acts as an agency of the State.
Fernandez v. Arizona Water Co. 516 P.2d 49 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Fernandez v. Arizona Water Co. 516 P.2d 49 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Application of Trico Electric Co-operative, Inc.
Johnson v. Arizona Public Service Co. 498 P.2d 488 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
In Re Dos Cabezas Power District 498 P.2d 488 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
In Re Dos Cabezas Power District 498 P.2d 488 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Johnson v. Arizona Public Service Co. 498 P.2d 488 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Tucson Gas, Electric Light & Power Co. v. Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. 406 P.2d 740 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Tucson Gas, Electric Light & Power Co. v. Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. 406 P.2d 740 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
the hearing on the preliminary injunction and are of such a nature that no additional evidence could alter the adverse findings; or (2) were heretofore resolved by the Supreme Court of Arizona in the cases of Trico Electric Cooperative, , , (1959), and Application of Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Corona De Tucson, Inc. *109 v. Senner), , , (1962); or (3) were not disputed by plaintiff or material to a final disposition of the question of plaintiff’s right to a permanent injunction.
Davis v. Corporation Commission 393 P.2d 909 Ariz. 1964
Davis v. Corporation Commission 393 P.2d 909 Ariz. 1964
Cf. Application of Trico Electric Cooperative, Inc., , .