People ex rel. Madigan v. Illinois Commerce Commission

988 N.E.2d 146 (2013)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

People ex rel. Madigan v. Illinois Commerce Commission

Illinois Appellate Court
988 N.E.2d 146 (2013)

  • Written by Brett Stavin, JD

Facts

In March 2007, Peoples Gas Light & Coke Company and North Shore Gas Company (the utilities) petitioned the Illinois Commerce Commission (the commission) (defendant) to approve a volume-balancing-adjustment rider (Rider VBA) that would hold the utilities’ revenues constant despite reduced customer consumption by adjusting customer prices for natural gas such that prices would not be tied to customer consumption. If sales increased in a given period because of higher-than-expected sales, resulting in higher revenues, consumers would be given a credit; if sales were lower than expected, resulting in lower revenues, consumers would be surcharged. Through this true-up calculation, the utilities’ revenues would stay the same regardless of sales volume. In 2008 the commission approved Rider VBA as a four-year pilot program, and then in 2012 the commission approved it on a permanent basis. The commission reasoned that Rider VBA constituted a symmetric and transparent formula for ensuring that the utilities collected the approved distribution of revenue despite changes in consumption, and that it would reduce the need to engage in often-inaccurate forecasting, thereby improving stability for both the utilities and customers. The Illinois attorney general and the Citizens Utility Board (collectively, the petitioners) (plaintiffs) challenged the commission’s approval of Rider VBA, arguing that it violated the prohibitions against retroactive ratemaking and single-issue ratemaking. As to retroactive ratemaking, the petitioners argued that any credits or surcharges to the customers in the true-up calculation made the ratemaking retroactive. Additionally, as to single-issue ratemaking, the petitioners argued that Rider VBA constituted an improper automatic adjustment to existing rates based solely on actual customer usage.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Hutchinson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 834,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership