Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Northwestern Bell Telephone Company v. State, 216 N.W.2d 841.

50 citing documents.

Chrystal Gardner v. Accend Services Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Hoffman v. Northern States Power Co. 743 N.W.2d 751 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Hoffman v. Northern States Power Co. 743 N.W.2d 751 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 28 , ).
Schermer v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 721 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 2006
Schermer v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 721 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 2006
And in Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, we reaffirmed this principle, stating that “[rjatemaking is a legislative and not a judicial function.” 299 Minn. 1, 28
In Re Qwest's Wholesale Service Quality Standards 702 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2005
In Re Qwest's Wholesale Service Quality Standards 702 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2005
Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 28-30 , -59 (1974), where we held that the MPUC had the implied authority to order a refund to telephone subscribers when its rate order was reversed as unlawfully excessive.
Application of Minnegasco 565 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 1997
Application of Minnegasco 565 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 1997
Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 28-30 , -59 (1974).
Application of Minnegasco 556 N.W.2d 607 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Application of Minnegasco 556 N.W.2d 607 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , where the court addressed the issue whether the district court had erred by remanding telephone rate proceedings to the MPUC (at that time known as the Minnesota Public Service Commission) to “recompute revenue requirements and to determine an appropriate refund.” Id.
Petition of Northern States Power Gas Utility 519 N.W.2d 921 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Petition of Northern States Power Gas Utility 519 N.W.2d 921 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See Hibbing Taconite, d at 10 (citing Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 5-6 , ).
Computer Tool & Engineering, Inc. v. Northern States Power Co. 453 N.W.2d 569 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Computer Tool & Engineering, Inc. v. Northern States Power Co. 453 N.W.2d 569 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 28
Petition of Northern States Power Co. 416 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 1987
Petition of Northern States Power Co. 416 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 1987
761 (1935) said, “[g]ood faith is to be presumed on the part of the managers of a business * * * as to the measure of a prudent outlay.” NSP, the administrative law judge and the court of appeals likewise rely upon a statement of this court in Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 14-15
Petition of Northern States Power Co. 402 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Petition of Northern States Power Co. 402 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , the supreme court approved the Commission’s use of the utility’s actual capital structure.
In Re Continental Telephone Co. of Minnesota 389 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1986
In Re Continental Telephone Co. of Minnesota 389 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1986
We have recognized that the statutory system gives MPUC “the duty as well as the power to set a just and reasonable rate after a full review of evidence and testimony.” (emphasis added); Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1
Application of Northwestern Bell Telephone 371 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Application of Northwestern Bell Telephone 371 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Northwestern Bell Telephone Company v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 28
Application of Northwestern Bell Tel. Co. 367 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Application of Northwestern Bell Tel. Co. 367 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
In Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , the supreme court held the Commission had authority to investigate prices charged by affiliated suppliers.
Petition of Inter-City Gas Corp. 358 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Petition of Inter-City Gas Corp. 358 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 30 , -59 (1974).
In Re Continental Telephone Co. of Minnesota, Inc. 358 N.W.2d 400 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
In Re Continental Telephone Co. of Minnesota, Inc. 358 N.W.2d 400 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , (in both cases the Minnesota Supreme Court considered issues raised by notice of review).
Central Telephone Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 356 N.W.2d 696 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Central Telephone Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 356 N.W.2d 696 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Appellant claims the new standard violates the case law set out in Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , [hereinafter cited as Northwestern Bell ]
Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 344 N.W.2d 374 Minn. 1984
Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 344 N.W.2d 374 Minn. 1984
255 (1930), and Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1
Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 342 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 342 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
Peoples cites Northwestern Bell Telephone Company v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , as the source of this requirement.
Minnesota Power & Light Co. v. Minnesota Public Service Commission 310 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1981
Minnesota Power & Light Co. v. Minnesota Public Service Commission 310 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1981
2 A utility is entitled to a fair rate of return which we have defined as one which “will provide earnings to investors comparable to those realized in other businesses which are attended by similar risks, will allow the company to attract new capital as required, and will maintain the company’s financial integrity * * Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 5
State ex rel. Spannaus v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 304 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1981
State ex rel. Spannaus v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 304 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1981
Cf. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , (statute does not prohibit authorization of refund).
Hibbing Taconite Co. v. Minnesota Public Service Commission 302 N.W.2d 5 Minn. 1980
Hibbing Taconite Co. v. Minnesota Public Service Commission 302 N.W.2d 5 Minn. 1980
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 5-6
Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Arizona Corp. Commission 604 P.2d 1144 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
MOUNTAIN STATES, ETC. v. Ariz. Corp. Com'n 604 P.2d 1144 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Hepfel v. Bashaw 279 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 1979
Minnesota Distillers, Inc. v. Novak 265 N.W.2d 420 Minn. 1978
Minnesota Distillers, Inc. v. Novak 265 N.W.2d 420 Minn. 1978
See, Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1 , In re Certain School Districts, Freeborn County, 246 Minn. 96 , State ex rel.
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State 253 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 1977
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State 253 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 1977
Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 5 , we summarized the rate-making process: “The process by which rates are fixed is, first, to determine the value of the company’s property represented by the equity of its stockholders; second, to establish a fair rate of return which will provide earnings to investors comparable to thos
St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce v. Minnesota Public Service Commission 251 N.W.2d 350 Minn. 1977
St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce v. Minnesota Public Service Commission 251 N.W.2d 350 Minn. 1977
We recently reaffirmed this principle in Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. State, 299 Minn. 1, 28 , : “* * * Ratemaking is a legislative and not a judicial function.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by