Court Opinion

ID: 9611539
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 03:57:55.555967+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:34:40.705118
License: Public Domain

SOSA, Justice, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. The findings of the trial court having been based on substantial evidence, I would affirm its decision. The trial court made a specific finding, with which I concur, that the Commission’s findings were not unreasonable. The evidence indicated that the plant was overbuilt; therefore, it would be inequitable to saddle the present residents with the costs of maintaining the entire water system when those residents only comprise less than one-fourth of the projected development. Furthermore, the majority takes the position that the appellant’s expert witness’ testimony was arbitrarily disregarded by the trier of fact. I cannot agree with this. I firmly believe that although the two expert witnesses’ testimony were at a complete variance with each other, the Commission and the trial court viewed the testimony of the two and chose to find for the Commission’s witness. This in my mind was not an abuse of their discretion. I would therefore affirm.