Cole v. Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the Commission exercises substantial discretion in selecting the appropriate rate-making methodology, and “[t]his is especially true where, as here, the issues involve complex factual determinations peculiarly within the expertise of the commission”
• where agency was required to set rates that were just, fair, reasonable, and sufficient, the court was to utilize an arbitrary and capricious standard of review
• where agency was required to set rates which were just, fair, reasonable, and sufficient, the court was to utilize an arbitrary and capricious standard of review
• burden of proof is on the appellant to show the findings and conclusions of the Commission are unlawful, unsupported by the evidence, arbitrary or capricious—and this is especially true when the issues involve complex factual determinations peculiarly within the expertise of the Commission
• burden of proof is on the appellant to show the findings and conclusions of the Commission are unlawful, unsupported by the evidence, arbitrary or capricious—and this is especially true when the issues involve complex factual determinations peculiarly within the expertise of the Commission
• burden of proof is on the appellant to show the findings and conclusions of the Commission are unlawful, unsupported by the evidence, arbitrary or capricious—and this is especially true when the issues involve complex factual determinations peculiarly within the expertise of the Commission

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).