Sierra Club v. Miss. Pub. Service Comm'n, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2011-CA-00350-SCT Linked Case(s): 2011-CA-00350-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: |
Opinion Date: 05-10-2012 Holding: Sierra Club's Motion for Order in Aid of Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative for Writ of Prohibition is denied. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Public utilities - Public Service Commission - Section 77-3-59 - Findings to support decision Dissenting Author : Kitchens, J., would grant. Nature of the Case: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-28-2011 Appealed from: Harrison County Chancery Court Judge: Jim Persons Case Number: C2401-10-0258(1) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Sierra Club |
|
||
| Appellee: | Mississippi Public Service Commission and Mississippi Power Company, Inc. | |||
| Appellee #2: | ||||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Public utilities - Public Service Commission - Section 77-3-59 - Findings to support decision |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi Power Company applied to the Mississippi Public Service Commission for permission to proceed with construction of a new power generation facility that would employ a new technology not in operation anywhere else in the United States, and to begin assessing the cost of construction to its current customers. The Sierra Club opposed the project before the Commission, but the Commission entered an order in favor of MPC. The chancery court affirmed, and the Sierra Club appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | When the Commission grants authority for such projects, Mississippi law requires it to make findings supporting its decision. Section 77-3-59 requires that the Commission’s findings be “supported by substantial evidence presented” which “shall be in sufficient detail to enable [this] court on appeal to determine the controverted questions presented, and the basis of the commission's conclusion.” Here, the Commission’s approval of the project fails to satisfy this requirement. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
