Opinion ID: 4387908
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: ¶16 This Court's review of decisions of the Commission is governed by the Oklahoma Constitution, article 9, § 20, which states as follows, in relevant part: The Supreme Court's review of appealable orders of the Corporation Commission shall be judicial only, and in all appeals involving an asserted violation of any right of the parties under the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma, the Court shall exercise its own independent judgment as to both the law and the facts. In all other appeals from orders of the Corporation Commission the review by the Supreme Court shall not extend further than to determine whether the Commission has regularly pursued its authority, and whether the findings and conclusions of the Commission are sustained by the law and substantial evidence. Okla. Const. art. 9, § 20. ¶17 The issue in this appeal concerns the Commission's legal interpretation of the OUSF statute and the alleged arbitrary and capricious denial of funding in violation of the Oklahoma Constitution. Constitutional implications as well as statutory interpretation dictate our de novo review of this case. Cox Oklahoma Telecom, LLC v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 2007 OK 55, ¶9, n.17, 164 P.3d 150, 156. Under the de novo standard of review, the Court has plenary, independent and non-deferential authority to determine whether the trial tribunal erred in its legal rulings. Cox Oklahoma Telecom, LLC v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 2007 OK 55, ¶9, n.16, 164 P.3d 150, 156; Neil Acquisition v. Wingrod Investment Corp., 1996 OK 125, ¶5, 932 P.2d 1100, 1103; Fanning v. Brown , 2004 OK 7, ¶8, 85 P.3d 841, 845. ¶18 This Court has found that the Commission's power must be exercised only within the confines of its limited jurisdiction as provided by the Oklahoma Constitution and state statute. 4 Pub. Serv. Co. v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n , 1997 OK 145, ¶23, 948 P.2d 713, 717. The Commission's power to regulate is not unfettered. Pub. Serv. Co. v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n , 1996 OK 43, ¶21, 918 P.2d 733, 738.