City of Hartford v. Hartford Elec. Light Co.

• Decision Date: 13 December 1976
• Citation: 172 Conn. 71,372 A.2d 131
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: CITY OF HARTFORD v. The HARTFORD ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY. CONNECTICUT CITIZEN ACTION GROUP et al. v. The CONNECTICUT LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY et al. HARTFORD CONSUMER ACTIVISTS ASSOCIATION et al. v. The HARTFORD ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY et al. OFFICE OF CONSUMER COUNSEL v. The HARTFORD ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY et al. OFFICE OF CONSUMER COUNSEL v. The CONNECTICUT LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY et al.

Page 131

372 A.2d 131

172 Conn. 71

CITY OF HARTFORD v. The HARTFORD ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY.

CONNECTICUT CITIZEN ACTION GROUP et al. v. The CONNECTICUT LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY et al.

HARTFORD CONSUMER ACTIVISTS ASSOCIATION et al. v. The HARTFORD ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY et al.

OFFICE OF CONSUMER COUNSEL v. The HARTFORD ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY et al.

OFFICE OF CONSUMER COUNSEL v. The CONNECTICUT LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY et al.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Dec. 13, 1976.

Ralph C. Dixon and Palmer S McGee, Jr., Hartford, for appellants (named defendants).

Robert S. Golden, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee (defendant Public Utilities Control Authority).

Alexander A. Goldfarb, Peter G. Boucher and Barry S. Zitser, Hartford, for appellees (named plaintiff et al.).

David Silverstone, Hartford, for appellee (plaintiff Office of Consumer Counsel).

Before LOISELLE, LONGO, RUBINOW, NARUK and HAMILL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Two of the appellants in these cases, the Hartford Electric Light Company and the Connecticut Light and Power Company, have moved this court for expedited appeals and for other relief.

Section 762 of the Practice Books states in part: 'In the interest of expediting decision, or for other good cause shown, the supreme court may suspend the requirements or provisions of any of these rules in a particular case on application of a party or on its own motion and may order proceedings in accordance with its direction.'

The motion to expedite the appeals is granted. The following orders are therefore entered: The exhibits in the appeals shall not be printed in the record on appeal; if they have not already done so, the appellants shall designate the parts of the files to be included in that record, pursuant to § 612A of the Practice Book, by December 17, 1976; by December 27, 1976, the appellees shall designate any additional parts of the files they wish to have included in the record; the appellants shall file their briefs within twenty-one days after the record is distributed; the appellees shall file their briefs within twenty-one days after the appellants' briefs are filed. When the briefs of all parties have been filed, this court will assign the appeals for hearing.

These expedited appeals have been granted for two reasons. First, the cases are of great public importance, as they involve the rates properly chargeable by the utilities to their numerous customers. Second, we have clearly stated in a prior opinion ¹ that the rates to be charged by the utilities during the pendency of these appeals are a matter for the public utilities control authority (PUCA) to determine. Nevertheless, our opinions have been misinterpreted to an extent that members of the PUCA and officers of the utilities have been exposed to charges alleging contempt of court, arising from judgments that are on appeal and the validity of which have not yet...