Title: In re Petition of CSX Transp., Inc.

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In 
re Petition of CSX Transp., Inc., Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-1316.] 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2010-OHIO-1316 
IN RE PETITION OF CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. TO CLOSE TO VEHICULAR 
TRAFFIC THE COUNTY ROAD 205/ULSH ROAD GRADE CROSSING (262-061N), 
LOCATED IN CLARIDON TOWNSHIP, MARION COUNTY, OHIO. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as In re Petition of CSX Transp., Inc.,  
Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-1316.] 
(No. 2010-0127 — Submitted March 24, 2010 — Decided April 1, 2010.) 
APPEAL from the Public Utilities Commission, No. 09-125-RR-UNC. 
ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS 
__________________ 
{¶ 1} This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Public 
Utilities Commission of Ohio.  Appellee and intervening appellee have filed 
motions to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, asserting that appellant 
failed to perfect its appeal. 
{¶ 2} The motions to dismiss are granted.  Accordingly, this cause is 
dismissed. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
MOYER, C.J., and LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, O’DONNELL, 
LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
PFEIFER, J., concurs separately. 
__________________ 
PFEIFER, J., concurring. 
{¶ 3} I concur in the decision to dismiss the appeal but write separately 
to emphasize that dual filing requirements should be abolished.  A. Schulman, Inc. 
v. Wilkins, 112 Ohio St.3d 1208, 2006-Ohio-6677, 859 N.E.2d 553, ¶ 6 (Pfeifer, 
J., dissenting).  They serve no useful purpose.  Olympic Steel, Inc. v. Cuyahoga 
Cty. Bd. of Revision, 110 Ohio St.3d 1242, 2006-Ohio-4091, 852 N.E.2d 178 
(Pfeifer, J., dissenting).  Dual filing requirements are a trap for attorneys operating 
outside their normal area of practice.  Prosecuting attorneys are not normally 
expert in the procedures associated with public utility law.  In this case, that led to 
the prosecuting attorney failing to deliver a notice of appeal to the PUCO's 
docketing division and, ultimately, to a dismissal other than on the merits.  In 
other circumstances, I might have cast a dissenting vote, but in this case, the 
prosecuting attorney had an opportunity to cure the filing defect but did not avail 
himself of it. 
__________________ 
 
Brent W. Yager, Marion County Prosecuting Attorney, for appellant, 
Claridon Township Board of Trustees. 
 
Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and Duane W. Luckey and William L. 
Wright, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee, Public Utilities Commission of 
Ohio. 
 
Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur, L.L.P., R. Leland Evans, and Megan E. 
Bailey, for intervening appellee, CSX Transportation, Inc. 
______________________