Williamson v. Montana Public Service Commission & Northwestern Energy
2012 MT 32
| Mont. | 2012Background
- Appellants filed a complaint with the Montana PSC challenging NorthWestern Energy's street lighting rates and practices.
- The PSC dismissed for lack of standing under § 69-3-321(1), MCA, and the district court affirmed.
- An amended complaint added four more complainants (Grubas and Barsantis) to pursue standing.
- The PSC rejected both the original standing and the amended complaint, finding no proper standing and procedural bar.
- The district court and PSC based standing analysis on the theory that only street-lighting class customers could be directly affected.
- On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court reversed in part, holding original complainants lacked standing but Grubas/Barsantis had standing and remanded for PSC to exercise its discretion on the amended complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do the original complainants have standing under § 69-3-321(1)? | Complainants are directly affected by NorthWestern's rates and environmental impacts. | Only direct payors in the street lighting class have standing; others are not directly affected. | Original complainants lack standing. |
| Was the amended complaint properly rejected, or should the PSC consider it? | Grubas and Barsantis are directly affected via property taxes and LED ownership overcharges; amendments should be allowed. | Amendment was procedurally barred and Grubas/Barsantis lack standing; no reconsideration of dismissal was warranted. | PSC erred; Grubas and Barsantis have standing and the case should be remanded to decide whether to allow the amended complaint. |
Key Cases Cited
- Plan Helena, Inc. v. Helena Regl. Airport Auth. Bd., 355 Mont. 142 (2010 MT 26) (administrative standing guidance; case-or-controversy in agencies)
- Heffernan v. Missoula City Council, 360 Mont. 207 (2011 MT 91) (prudential standing principles; limits on standing in public actions)
- Armstrong v. State, 296 Mont. 361 (1999 MT 261) (special expertise exception to standing to litigate third-party rights)
- Olson v. Dept. of Revenue, 726 P.2d 1162 (Mont. 1986) (standing; personal stake requirement and constitutional basis)
- Union Interchange, Inc. v. Parker, 357 P.2d 339 (Mont. 1960) (pleading amendments and procedural liberalization)