Palm Coast Utility Corp. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Palm Coast Utility Corp. v. State

581 So. 2d 243, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6292, 1991 WL 103469

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 13, 1991

DocketNo. 90-3033

StatusPublished

This text of 581 So. 2d 243 (Palm Coast Utility Corp. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Palm Coast Utility Corp. v. State, 581 So. 2d 243, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6292, 1991 WL 103469 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find that the final order issued by the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) is supported by competent, substantial evidence and reasonable inferences which may be drawn therefrom. We also find that Palm Coast Utility Corporation failed to show that the PSC’s order, which granted appellant a substantial rate increase, albeit not in the full amount requested, was arbitrary or capricious. Appellant has failed to argue here or prove below that the rate increases approved by the PSC were unjust or unreasonable for failure to provide the utility with a fair rate of return. No departure from the essential requirements of law or abuse of discretion having been demonstrated, we AFFIRM the order appealed from.

SMITH, NIMMONS and MINER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We find that the final order issued by the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) is supported by competent, substantial evidence and reasonable inferences which may be drawn therefrom. We also find that Palm Coast Utility Corporation failed to show that the PSC’s order, which granted appellant a substantial rate increase, albeit not in the full amount requested, was arbitrary or capricious. Appellant has failed to argue here or prove below that the rate increases approved by the PSC were unjust or unreasonable for failure to provide the utility with a fair rate of return. No departure from the essential requirements of law or abuse of discretion having been demonstrated, we AFFIRM the order appealed from.

SMITH, NIMMONS and MINER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 So. 2d 243, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6292, 1991 WL 103469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palm-coast-utility-corp-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.