People ex rel. Madigan v. Illinois Commerce Commission
967 N.E.2d 863
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- ComEd sought a $360 million rate increase using 2006 as test year and included new distribution plant in rates.
- The Commission approved Rider SMP to recover smart-grid modernization costs, including AMI deployment.
- AMI involved meters, CAP, and anticipated staff reductions; Phase 0 planned 200,000 AMI meters.
- AG and CUB appealed the Rider SMP decision; a stay was issued pending appeal.
- In 2010 this court reversed Rider SMP as improper single-issue ratemaking; caselaw influenced subsequent rulings.
- The AG now argues collateral estoppel and law of the case bar relitigation and that Riders AMP/AMP-CA still constitute improper single-issue ratemaking.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Collateral estoppel bars relitigating Rider AMP/AMP-CA validity. | AG asserts elements met. | ComEd/Commission contend issue not identical. | Yes, collateral estoppel applies. |
| Law of the case bars relitigation of the rider issue. | AG relies on law-of-the-case prior ruling. | ComEd/Commission argue no binding effect. | Yes, law-of-the-case binds. |
| Riders AMP and AMP-CA constitute improper single-issue ratemaking. | Riders address Phase 0 and CAP costs; single issue. | Riders justified by external costs and pass-through nature. | Yes, both riders constitute improper single-issue ratemaking. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Illinois Commerce Comm’n, 405 Ill. App. 3d 389 (2010) (reversed Rider SMP for single-issue ratemaking)
- Citizens Utility Board v. Illinois Commerce Comm’n, 166 Ill. 2d 111 (1995) (rider analysis and ratemaking principles)
- In re A.W., 231 Ill. 2d 92 (2008) (collateral estoppel standards in Illinois)
- Norris v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, 368 Ill. App. 3d 576 (2006) (law-of-the-case doctrine applicability)
- Gumma v. White, 216 Ill. 2d 23 (2005) (elements of collateral estoppel)