DIS - Case Record for 92-1032-EL-CSS Skip to main content

Case Record For:

92-1032-EL-CSS

File a Public Comment
Case Title: CHURCH OF CHRIST VS CSP
Status: AR-Archived
Industry Code: EL-ELECTRIC
Purpose Code: CSS-Complaint on service or safety
Date Opened: 6/5/1992
Date Closed: 2/4/1993
Printable Docket Card Service List
View per page
Date FiledSummaryPages
02/04/1993Entry granting the joint motion requesting that this case be dismissed and closing this case of record.0
01/28/1993Joint motion for dismissal filed on behalf of complainant by L. Bell and respondent, Columbus Southern Power, by F. Dutton.0
01/25/1993Transcript filed for hearing held 1/19/93, (SD), 9 pgs., Con't.0
01/19/1993Supplemental testimony of Sherri Loscko filed on behalf of complainant by L. Bell.0
01/12/1993Direct testimony of Gary L. Johnson filed on behalf of respondent, Columbus Southern Power, by F. Dutton.0
01/12/1993Prepared expert testimony of Ms. Sherri Loscko filed on behalf of complainant, Church of Christ, by L. Bell.0
11/20/1992Entry granting the joint motion of the parties for a con- tinuance. (AE)0
11/17/1992Joint motion for a continuance and memorandum in support filed on behalf of complainant by L. Bell and respondent by D. Conway.0
09/30/1992Transcript filed for hearing held 9/15/92, (SD), 7 pgs., Con't.0
08/28/1992Proof of Publication filed (Franklin)0
08/13/1992Legal notice sent to the Columbus Dispatch (Franklin County)0
07/31/1992Entry scheduling hearing at 10:00 a.m. on 9/15/92 at the Commission and denying the respondents request that this complaint be dismissed and that legal notice of hearing be published. (AE)0
06/29/1992Answer filed on behalf of respondent, Columbus Southern Power, by D. Conway.0
06/08/1992Complaint letter and copy of complaint mailed to: Columbus Southern Power, office of the president.0
06/05/1992In the matter of the complaint of The Church of Christ of the Apostolic Faith (vs) Columbus Southern Power Company relative to the alleged unjust, unlawful, and unreasonable failure to advise complainant as to the availability of Rate GS-2 which would have enabled complainant to receive electric service at a lower price.0