Court Opinion

ID: 9605719
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:41:10.698807+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:20:21.297620
License: Public Domain

Hill, Justice,
concurring specially.
The difficulty with this case as I see it, is that it is a de novo proceeding to determine what are just and reasonable rates. Georgia Pub. Serv. Commission v. General Telephone Co. of Ga., 227 Ga. 727 (182 SE2d 793). The majority finds such a de novo proceeding to be judicially unmanageable, and in this I concur.
The General Telephone case arose out of the necessity of the facts of that case, which have now been eliminated by statute. Ga. L. 1972, p. 137 (Code Ann. § 93-307.1).
The General Telephone decision was predicated at least in part on City of Atlanta v. Atlanta Gas Light Co., 149 Ga. 405 (100 SE 439), which the majority today disapproves. Instead of disapproving the latter case, I would disapprove its descendant, the General Telephone decision, eliminate the de novo aspect and thereby restore order and manageability to this process.
The elimination of the de novo proceeding and the return of manageability would avoid general rate regulation by lawsuit which the majority justifiably seeks to avoid.
*569In the absence of overruling the General Telephone decision, I concur in the judgment.