South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1921-07-01
COURT DECISION
HALTS INCREASE
OF POWER RATES
Restraining Order Issued by
Jurist Scores Victory For
Consumers

Users OF electric power and cur
rent I'm south Bend and tho entire
S. Joseph valley won a signal VIC
tory against increased rates when
Judge William 3. lille o fthe Elk
hart superior court gave MS decis-
ion Thursday morning granting
temporary injunction against the en-
forcement Of the higher rate sched-
ule approved by the public service
commission o. Indiana.
Judge Hue held I'M substance that
the public service commission eX-
ceeded its authority ia authorizing
the new rates 20 90 into effect Jess
than 30 days from the time that the
new schedules are filed with the
service commission. Judge lille
made a number Of important decIs-
ions bearing on the case. many OF
which are without precedent.
Power users OF south Bend were
represented by ~. O Crabil Of An
derson. Parker. Crabil and Crum-
packer. while ex-Judge James i.
Harmon VI Elkhar- appeared for
the consumers of that city. Besides
South Bend. Elkhart, Mishawaka.
Cohen. LigonIer and other cities in
the valley were affected.
Company Seeks decrease
The Indiana & Michigan Electric
CO. last Toll peutoned for the rate
increase which after a hearing be-
fore the public service commission
was allowed on May %, granting an
increase Of one-third Of the raise
that the utility peddoued for. The
commission provided that the new
rates should take effect June T.
The various consumers by counsel
and cities by city attorneys APP
peaIed from the decision OF the state
commission to the Elkhart superior
court for a temporary injunction re-
straining the board from putting in
the rate increase until the court can
pass the merit OF the rate increase
petition.
The comm ission was represented
by w. a. McInerny, counsel for the
Indiana & Michigan who appeared
in behalf Of the attorney general Of
Indiana. Mr. McInerny commended
that the court has no power 20 grant
a temporary injunction, but Judge
lille ruled that the court did have
the power inasmuch as the Indiana
statutes differ fr1m laws Of other
states I'm that the Indiana laws pro-
vide distinct injunctive relief, and
that in such cases the inherent pow
q RI
porary injunction.
Held Order Illegal
The petitioners TO the superior
court maintained that the commits
sion order was Illegal They charged
that it was c0ntravent 10 the statute
which provides that new rates shall
not 20 into effect until 80 days after
the new schedule is filed with the
commission. The Elkhart court
held that the commission exceeded
its powers in ordering the rate TO so
into effect June 1, when the order
entering am increased rate was made
on May %
The utility commission through
Mr.. McInerny sought 90 Justify its
act by calling It on emergency order
for rate increase. but again the court
held that the rate petition did not in
dictate that it was filed under the
emergency order under which they
did not need so days before going
into effect was not ENABLE.
Temporary Restrain order.
The final order of the court was
that q temporary injunction should
be granted at all events until 30 days
from the date on which the order
was issued 10y the commission and
should be continued in effect until
q final hearing unless the Indiana
& Michigan Electric Co. should IN
terpIead the proceedings.
Tn this event. the utility must hle
a bond with surety 20 he approved
by tie court that 80 would refund
20 its consumers excess charges un-
der the new rate if upon fnal hear
Ing the new rates shall De held un-
reasonable and unlawful
The court further held that the
consumers would not be required 90
give bond 10 secure this temporary
restrainiuC order inasmuch as the
defendant was a public service COM
mission. which had no pesuniary In
terest I'm the result Of the outcome
and whose expenses are paid by tax
alton of people as coordinate
branch of the government.
The record was put in shape by
Mr. NcIueruv for an appeal % test
The propriety of The ruln-~ made by
49,, rTfra +1 FN al precedent and