Skip to main content

Case Record For:

96-0142-TP-CSS

File a Public Comment
Case Title: SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS/AMERITECH OH
Status: AR-Archived
Industry Code: TP-TELEPHONE
Purpose Code: CSS-Complaint on service or safety
Date Opened: 2/13/1996
Date Closed: 9/11/1997
Printable Docket Card Service List
View per page
Date FiledSummaryPages
11/10/1997Update to service list filed on behalf of AT&T Communica- tions of Ohio by J. Troup. (1 pg.)1
11/06/1997Entry ordering that the September 11, 1997 Opinion & Order is clarified to the extent set forth in this entry, and the applications for rehearing of Ameritech, Sprint, MCI, and AT&T are granted to the extent set forth in this entry; that this case be closed of record.16
10/30/1997Update to service list filed on behalf of AT&T Communica- tions of Ohio by J. Troup. (1 pg.)1
10/24/1997Memorandum contra to Ameritech Ohio's application for re- hearing, filed on behalf of AT&T Communications of Ohio by B. Kahn. (7 pgs.)7
10/24/1997Memorandum contra joint application for rehearing, filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (6 pgs.)6
10/22/1997Joint memorandum contra application for rehearing of Ameri- tech Ohio, filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Co. L.P. by M. Jenkins; and MCI Telecommunications Corp. by B. Royer and D. Townsley. (13 pgs.)13
10/20/1997Memorandum contra AT&T's application for rehearing, filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (4 pgs.)4
10/14/1997Joint application for rehearing filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Company L.P. by M. Jenkins; and MCI Telecommunications Corp. by B. Royer and D. Townsley.14
10/14/1997Ameritech Ohio's application for rehearing filed by J. Kelly. (24 pgs.)21
10/10/1997Application for rehearing and/or request for clarification of AT&T Communications of Ohio, Inc. filed by B. Kahn. (5 pgs.)5
09/11/1997Opinion & Order that AT&T's motion to intervene for the purpose of filing comments, exceptions, and replies is granted; that the renewed request by Sprint and MCI to reopen the record is denied; that this complaint is granted in part and denied in part; that Ameritech shall submit its proposed customer notice to the Commission within 90 days of this order; Ameritech shall implement the means by which to comply with the directives within 120 days of this order; that Ameritech shall cease and desist from disseminating less than accurate information regarding PPC. (37 pgs.)37
09/08/1997Copy of September 5, 1997, Order of the Illinois Appellate Court, First Judicial District in Case Nos. 1-96-2146 and 1-96-2166, filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (24 pgs.)24
04/09/1997Reply to Ameritech Ohio's memorandum contra AT&T's motion to intervene, filed on behalf of AT&T Communications of Ohio by B. Kahn. (6 pgs.)6
03/27/1997Reply to exceptions and reply comments filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (16 pgs.)16
03/27/1997Joint reply to exceptions and comments of Ameritech Ohio, filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Co. by M. Jenkins; and MCI Telecommunications by D. Townsley and B. Royer. (12 pgs.)12
03/27/1997Reply to comments and exceptions filed on behalf of AT&T Communications of Ohio by B. Kahn. (7 pgs.)7
03/27/1997Memorandum contra AT&T's motion to intervene, filed on be- half of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (5 pgs.)5
03/18/1997Corrected joint exceptions to Attorney Examiner's report filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Co. by M. Jenkins; and MCI Telecommunications Corp. by B. Royer. (11 pgs.)11
03/12/1997Exceptions to Attorney Examiner's report and initial com- ments filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (42 pgs.)42
03/12/1997Motion to intervene and memorandum in support filed on be- half of AT&T Communications by B. Kahn. (5 pgs.)5
03/12/1997Comments and exceptions filed on behalf of AT&T Communi- cations by B. Kahn. (9 pgs.)9
03/12/1997Joint comments filed on behalf of Sprint Communications by M. Jenkins; and MCI Telecommunications by D. Townsley and B. Royer. (9 pgs.)9
03/12/1997Joint exceptions to Attorney Examiner's report filed on behalf of Sprint Communications by M. Jenkins; MCI Tele- communications by D. Townsley and B. Royer. (10 pgs.)10
02/20/1997Entry ordering that the motion to reopen the record is granted for the limited purpose of allowing the parties to file comments; that the parties may file exceptions to the attached attorney examiner's report and comments regarding the issues set forth in Finding 9 by March 12, 1997, and file replies to the exceptions/comments by March 27, 1997. (29 pgs.)29
02/18/1997Joint reply of Sprint Communications Company L.P., MCI Telecommunications Corporation, and The Ohio Consumers' Counsel to Ameritech Ohio memorandum contra motion to reopen filed by M. Jenkins, D. Townsley, E. Robinson-McGriff, B. Royer. (9 pgs.)9
02/10/1997Memorandum contra joint motion to reopen filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (6 pgs.)6
01/21/1997Joint motion to reopen and memorandum in support filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Co. by M. Jenkins; OCC by E. Robinson-McGriff; MCI Telecommunications by D. Townsley and B. Royer. (11 pgs.)11
01/15/1997Letter regarding Ameritech Ohio's slamming protection pro- gram, filed by J. Kelly. (3 pgs.)3
08/27/1996Reply brief of MCI filed by D. Townsley and B. Royer.19
08/27/1996Reply brief of the PUCO filed by S. Reilly.20
08/27/1996Reply brief filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (29 pgs.)29
08/27/1996Reply brief filed on behalf of MCI Telecommunications Corp. by D. Townsley and J. Sanders. (19 pgs.)19
08/27/1996Letter stating that OCC will not file a reply brief in this proceeding, filed by E. Robinson-McGriff. (1 pg.)1
08/27/1996Reply brief filed on behalf of the PUCO staff by S. Reilly. (21 pgs.)21
08/27/1996Reply brief filed on behalf of complainant by M. Jenkins. (13 pgs.)13
08/20/1996Initial post hearing brief of MCI filed by D. Townsley and B. Royer35
08/20/1996Post hearing brief of the PUCO filed by P. Colbert and S. Reilly.11
08/20/1996Initial joint brief of Sprint and OCC filed by W. Adams and E. Robinson-McGriff43
08/20/1996Initial joint brief filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Company L.P. by W. Adams, and OCC by E. Robinson-McGriff. (43 pgs.)43
08/20/1996Initial brief filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (104 pgs.)104
08/20/1996Initial post-hearing brief filed on behalf of MCI Telecom- munications Corp. by D. Townsley and B. Royer. (35 pgs.)35
08/20/1996Post-hearing bried filed on behalf of the PUCO staff by P. Colbert and S. Reilly. (11 pgs.)11
08/12/1996Letter stating that counsel for all the parties actively participating in this proceeding have agreed to a one-week extension of the dates previously established for filing post-hearing briefs, filed by B. Royer. (1 pg.)1
08/12/1996Letter stating that counsel for all the parties actively participating in this case have agreed to a one-week extension of the dates previously established for filing post-hearing briefs, filed by B. Royer. (1 pg.)1
08/12/1996Letter stating all parties have agreed to a one week extension of time for filing briefs filed by B. Royer, MCI.1
08/02/1996A copy of the 8/1/96 Opinion and Order of the Michigan Public Service Commission along with the dissenting opinion of Commissioner John C. Shea filed by J. Kelly of Ameritech Ohio.31
08/02/1996Copy of the August 1, 1996, Opinion and Order of the Michigan Public Service Commission in Case No. U-11038, along with the dissenting opinion of Commissioner John C. Shea, filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (31 pgs.)31
07/22/1996Transcript filed for hearing held 7/16/96, (GP), 59 pgs., Submitted. (PUCO-Columbus, Ohio) (Volume II)59
07/22/1996A corrected transcript ASCII disk, page 58, and late-filed Exhibit No. 3 filed by L. Riffle of McGinnis Court Reporting & Forensic Video6
07/22/1996Corrected ASCII disk and page 58 of the transcript from the hearing taken on June 27, 1996, and Sprint's late-filed Exhibit No. 3, filed by McGinnis & Associates by L. Riffle. (6 pgs.)6
07/20/1996Initial brief of Ameritech Ohio filed by J. Kelly.104
07/16/1996Exhibit DLR-14 to the rebuttal testimony of MCI witness Dennis L. Ricca, filed on behalf of MCI by B. Royer. (8 pgs.)8
07/16/1996Exhibit DLR-14 to the rebuttal testimony of Dennis L. Ricca filed by B. Royer on behalf of MCI.8
07/15/1996Motion to strike filed by J. Kelly on behalf of Ameritech Ohio24
07/15/1996Motion to strike and memorandum in support filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (24 pgs.)24
07/11/1996Rebuttal testimony of Dennis L. Ricca filed by B. Royer on behalf of MCI.44
07/11/1996Rebuttal testimony of Dennis L. Ricca filed on behalf of MCI Telecommunications Corp. by B. Royer. (44 pgs.)44
07/11/1996Rebuttal testimony of Edward K. Phelan filed on behalf of Sprint Communications by W. Adams. (9 pgs.)9
07/11/1996Rebuttal testimony of Edward K. Phelan filed by W. Adams on behalf of Sprint9
07/08/1996Transcipt for hearing held on June 27, 1996, (GP), 262 pgs. Vol. 1, cont.262
06/26/1996Motion to strike testimony, filed on behalf of Sprint Communication Company L.P. by W. Adams.10
06/26/1996Motion to strike testimony and memorandum in support filed on behalf of complainant, Sprint Communication, by W. Adams. (10 pgs.)10
06/24/1996Stipulations of fact filed27
06/24/1996Motion and memorandum in support to strike testimony filed by W. Adams on behalf of Sprint.10
06/24/1996Testimony of Richard C. Reese on behalf of PUCO.7
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Edward K. Phelan on behalf of Sprint Communications Company L.P.13
06/24/1996Notice of Michigan proposal for decision filed by W. Adams on behalf of Sprint.24
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Michael B. Suthers on behalf of Ameritech Ohio filed by J. Kelly36
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Lynne Thomson on behalf of Ameritech Ohio filed by J. Kelly74
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Dennis L. Ricca on behalf of MCI Telecommunications Corporation filed by J. Sanders71
06/24/1996Testimony of Richard C. Reese filed on behalf of the PUCO staff by P. Colbert. (7 pgs.)7
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Edward K. Phelan filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Co. (13 pgs.)13
06/24/1996Sprint Communications Company L.P.'s notice of Michigan proposal for decision filed by W. Adams. (24 pgs.)24
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Michael B. Suthers filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (36 pgs.)36
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Jason Few filed on behalf of respon- dent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (20 pgs.)20
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Lynne Thomson filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (74 pgs.)74
06/24/1996Direct testimony of Dennis L. Ricca filed on behalf of MCI Telecommunications Corp. by J. Sanders. (71 pgs.)71
06/24/1996Stipulations of fact filed on behalf of complainant, Sprint Communications Co., by W. Adams; respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly; and the PUCO staff by P. Colbert. (30 pgs.)30
06/21/1996Letter stating that the PUCO staff intends to file testimony on June 24, 1996 in this matter filed on behalf of the PUCO staff, by S. Reilly. (1 pg.)1
06/21/1996Letter stating Paul Colbert and Stephen Reilly will represent the PUCO in this case filed by Mr. Reilly.1
06/17/1996Proof of publication filed (Cuyahoga county)1
06/17/1996Proof of Publication filed. (Cuhahoga County) (1 pg.)1
06/14/1996Service Notice.2
06/13/1996Entry denying Sprint's motion to limit the issues at the June 27, 1996 hearing. (AE) (4 pgs.)4
06/11/1996Reply memorandum in support of its motion to limit issues at hearing, filed on behalf of complainant, Sprint Communica- tions, by W. Adams. (4 pgs.)4
06/11/1996Reply memorandum in support of its motion to limit issues at hearing filed by W. Adams on behalf of Sprint4
06/03/1996Memorandum contra motion to limit issues at hearing filed by J. Kelly on behalf of Ameritech.5
05/31/1996Notice of withdrawal of counsel and designation of new trial attorney filed by E. Robinson-McGriff on behalf of OCC.2
05/31/1996Notice of withdrawal of counsel and designation of new trial attorney filed on behalf of OCC by E. Robinson-McGriff. (2 pgs.)2
05/29/1996Legal Notices (Faxed) to: Columbus Dispatch (Franklin Co.) & Plain Dealer (Cuyahoga Co.).0
05/29/1996Service Notice0
05/28/1996Entry scheduling a public hearing at 10:00 a.m. on 6/27/96 at the Commission offices; that the motions to intervene of D&S and MCI are granted; that Ameritech's motion to dismiss is denied; that reasonable grounds for complaint have been stated; that any party intending to present direct, expert testimony should file such testimony and serve it upon all parties by 6/24/96. (AE) (6 pgs.)6
05/28/1996Entry granting motions to intervene of D&S and MCI; Ameritech's motion to dismiss is denied; a hearing will be held 6/27/96, 10:00 a.m. at the Commission offices; direct, expert testimony should be filed no later than 6/24/96. (AE)8
05/24/1996Reply of Ameritech Ohio filed by J. Kelly4
05/16/1996Memorandum contra motion to dismiss filed by J. Sanders and D. Townsley on behalf of MCI.5
05/16/1996Memorandum of MCI Telecommunications Corporation contra motion to dismiss filed by J. Sanders, D. Townsley. (5 pgs.)5
05/14/1996Memorandum contra Ameritech Ohio's motion to dismiss filed by W. Adams on behalf of Sprint.6
05/14/1996Motion to limit issues at hearing on its complaint and memorandum in support filed on behalf of complainant by W. Adams. (70 pgs.)70
05/14/1996Memorandum contra Ameritech Ohio's motion to dismiss, filed on behalf of complainant by W. Adams. (6 pgs.)6
05/13/1996Response to motions to intervene filed by Dial & Save of Ohio, Inc. and MCI Telecommunications Corporation filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (2 pgs.)2
05/13/1996Response to motions to intervene filed by J. Kelly on behalf of Ameritech.2
05/07/1996Entry ordering that the second settlement conference shall be held at 1:30 p.m. on 6/20/96 at the Commission offices. (AE) (2 pgs.)2
04/29/1996Answer of Ameritech Ohio filed by J. Kelly4
04/29/1996Motion to dismiss and memorandum in support filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (18 pgs.)18
04/29/1996Answer filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (4 pgs.)4
04/25/1996Letter withdrawing answer and motion to dismiss filed 3/5/96 filed by J. Kelly on behalf of Ameritech.1
04/24/1996Motion of MCI Telecommunications Corporation for leave to intervene filed byJ. Sanders and D. Townsley6
04/24/1996Motion for leave to intervene and memorandum in support filed on behalf of MCI Telecommunications Corp. by J. Sanders and D. Townsley. (6 pgs.)6
04/19/1996Entry granting OCC's motion to intervene; a settlement conference will be held 5/3/96, 1:30 p.m. at the Commission offices. (AE)4
04/19/1996Entry granting OCC's motion to intervene; scheduling a settlement conference at 1:30 p.m. on 5/3/96 at the Commission offices. (AE) (2 pgs.)2
04/08/1996Entry granting Sprint's motion to file an amended complaint; amended complaint filed 4/5/96 is accepted for filing; Ameritech has until 4/27/96 to file its answer to the amended complaint. (AE)4
04/08/1996Entry ordering that Sprint's request for an expedited ruling is warranted; Sprint's motion for leave to file an amended complaint instanter is granted; that the amended complaint that Sprint filed on April 5, 1996, is accepted for filing as of the date of this entry; that Ameritech shall file an answer to the amended complaint as well as any responsive pleading to the amended com- plaint by 4/27/96. (AE) (2 pgs.)2
04/05/1996Motion for leave to file amended complaint instanter and request for expedited ruling and memorandum in support filed on behalf of complainant by W. Adams. (4 pgs.)4
04/05/1996First amended complaint, filed on behalf of complainant by W. Adams. (32 pgs.)32
04/05/1996Motion and memorandum in support for leave to filed amended complaint instanter and request for expedited ruling filed by W. Adams on behalf of Sprint.4
04/05/1996First amended complaint against Ameritech Ohio filed by W. Adams on behalf of Sprint33
04/02/1996Motion to intervene and memorandum in support filed on behalf of Dial & Save of Ohio, Inc. dba Dial & Save by R. Blau. (4 pgs.)4
04/02/1996Motion to intervene of Dial & Save of Ohio, Inc. dba Dial & Save filed by R. Blau4
03/21/1996Entry ordering that Sprint's request for an expedited ruling is warranted. Sprint's motion for an extension of time is granted and it shall now have until April 8, 1996 to file a memorandum in response to Ameritech's motion to dismiss the complaint. (AE) (2 pgs.)2
03/21/1996Entry granting Sprint's motion for extension of time until 4/8/96 to file memorandum in response to Ameritech's motion to dismiss. (AE)3
03/20/1996Motion for extension of time and request for expedited ruling filed on behalf of Sprint Communications by D. Stin- son. (5 pgs.)5
03/20/1996Motion for extension of time and request for expedited ruling filed by D. Stinson on behalf of Sprint Communications Company L.P.5
03/11/1996Response of Ameritech Ohio filed by J. Kelly1
03/11/1996Letter of response to OCC's motion to intervene filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by J. Kelly. (1 pg.)1
03/05/1996Answer filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (4 pgs.)4
03/05/1996Motion to dismiss and memorandum in support filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by J. Kelly. (21 pgs.)21
03/05/1996Motion to dismiss and memorandum in support filed by J. Kelly on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio.21
03/05/1996Answer of Ameritech Ohio filed by J.Kelly.4
02/22/1996Motion to intervene and memorandum in support filed by D. Bergmann on behalf of OCC.6
02/22/1996Motion to intervene and memorandum in support filed on behalf of OCC by D. Bergmann. (6 pgs.)6
02/14/1996Complaint service letter and copy of complaint sent to Jon Kelly, Ameritech Ohio.1
02/14/1996Complaint letter and copy of complaint mailed to: Jon F. Kelly, Ameritech Ohio. (1 pg.)1
02/13/1996In the matter of the complaint of Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (vs) Ameritech Ohio relative to the alleged unjust and unreasonable misleading of consumers and impos- ing restrictions on regulated telephone service without the authority of the Public Utilities Commission. (19 pgs.)19
02/13/1996In the matter of the complaint of Sprint Communications L.P. (vs) Ameritech Ohio relative to the alleged unjust and unreasonable misleading of consumers and imposing restrictions on regulated telephone service without the authority of the PUCO.19