Methods of Judicial Review in Relation to the Effectiveness of Commission Control

• Published date: 01 May 1914
• DOI: 10.1177/000271621405300105
• Author: Oscar L. Pond
• Date: 01 May 1914
• Subject Matter: Articles

54

METHODS

OF

JUDICIAL

REVIEW

IN

RELATION

TO

THE

EFFECTIVENESS

OF

COMMISSION

CONTROL

BY

OSCAR

L.

POND,

Author "Public

Utilities;"

Attorney

at

Law,

Indianapolis,

Ind.

The

effectiveness

of

the

control

of

municipal

public

utilities

by

state

commissions

is

determined

by

the

thoroughness

of

their

find-

ings,

the

justice

of

their

rulings

and

the

extent

to

which

the

proceed-

ings

and

orders

of

the

commissions

are

sustained

by

the

courts

or

made

final

and

conclusive

by

statutory

enactments.

While

the

strength

of

commission

findings

and

the

validity

of

the

orders

issued

thereon

depend

upon

the

scope

and

accuracy

of

their

investigations

and

the

integrity

of

their

rulings,

the

force

and

effect

of

commission

control

depend

ultimately

upon

the

authority

conferred

on

the

commissions

by

the

legislatures

in

the

first

instance

and

the

extent

to

which

action

by

commissions

is

made

conclusive

of

the

contro-

versy.

The

right

of

review

or

appeal

to

the

courts

from

the

pro-

ceedings

of

commissions

limits

and

defines

the

sphere

of

their

effi-

ciency

and

determines

the

extent

to

which

the

courts

may

supplant,

modify

or

set

aside

the

action

of

commissions;

thereby

making

their

findings

and

orders

conditional

and

qualified,

and

not

absolute

and

final.

After

an

investigation

of

the

facts

on

due

notice,

usually

of

not

less

than

ten

days,

and

a

public

hearing,

the

proceedings

of

the

commission

have

been

concluded

and

disposed

of

with

an

order

or

regulation,

an

interested

party

may

generally

apply

to

the

commis-

sion

for

a

rehearing

because

of

additional

evidence,

changed

condi-

tions

or

errors

and

omissions

in

its

original

proceedings.

The

time

within

which

a

petition

for

rehearing

may

be

filed

is

limited

by

statute

in

Ohio

to

thirty

days,1

and

iri Pennsylvania

to

fifteen

days;’

while

in

Illinois

only

one

rehearing

may

be

granted,

which,

however,

does

not

prevent

any

party

after

two

years

from

again

applying

to

the

commission

upon

a

new

and

different

state

of

facts,3

and

in

1

Laws

1911,

p.

549,

sec.

45.

2

Laws

1913,

no.

854,

art.

VI,

sec.

14.

3

Laws

1913,

p.

459,

sec.

67.