State Ex Rel. Praxair, Inc. v. Missouri Public Service Commission
2011 Mo. LEXIS 201
| Mo. | 2011Background
- Praxair, Inc., AG Processing, Inc., and Sedalia Industrial Energy Users' Association appeal the PSC's merger approval of Great Plains Energy, Inc.'s acquisition of Aquila, Inc.
- Praxair contends the PSC failed to consider Great Plains' alleged inadequate gift policy and that the regulatory law judge erred by denying a written offer of proof on the policy.
- The PSC ruled that evidence on gift policies was wholly irrelevant and excluded offers of proof; the court later allowed a written proof to be filed on appeal.
- Public Counsel argues ex parte meetings between PSC commissioners and Great Plains executives created an appearance of impropriety requiring recusal; they challenged the merger on due process grounds.
- The Court holds the gift-policy evidence should have been admitted but exclusion was not prejudicial, and that the appearance of impropriety does not require recusal since no actual bias was shown.
- The judgment affirming the PSC decision is affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the written offer of proof on gift policy evidence must be admitted | Praxair argues the gift policy evidence is relevant and should be admitted. | Great Plains argues the evidence was wholly irrelevant and properly excluded. | Written offer of proof must be permitted; exclusion cannot bar review. |
| Whether ex parte pre-filing meetings created a bias requiring recusal | Public Counsel contends appearance of impropriety requires recusal and invalidates the PSC decision. | PSC argues due process is met; no actual bias shown and can proceed. | Appearance of impropriety exists, but no actual bias; PSC decision stands. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. AG Processing, Inc. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 120 S.W.3d 732 (Mo. banc 2003) (two-pronged review: lawfulness and reasonableness; substantial evidence standard)
- State ex rel. Atmos Energy Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 103 S.W.3d 753 (Mo. banc 2003) (judicial review of PSC orders; due process considerations)
- Asbury v. Lombardi, 846 S.W.2d 196 (Mo. banc 1993) (separation of powers and judicial review of agency decisions)
- Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35 (1975) (limits on bias concerns in agency adjudication; familiarity not automatic disqualification)
- Union Elec. Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 591 S.W.2d 134 (Mo. App. 1979) (due process and bias concerns in administrative adjudication)
- State ex rel. A & G Commercial Trucking v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 168 S.W.3d 680 (Mo. App. 2005) (MAPA and PSC gap-filling authority; offers of proof concept)