Sidney Brooks v. Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Arizona Corporation Commission

Good Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 15155·951 F.2d 1050·1991 WL 258853·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 28741
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 199190-16113California2,845 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

This appeal marks the latest battle in Sidney Brooks’ long-running campaign against a $6.50 monthly service availability charge imposed on him by Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative (“SSVEC”) with the approval of the Arizona Corporation Commission (“the Commission”). Brooks appeals pro se from a district court order granting summary judgment in favor of SSVEC and the Commission.

I

On November 18, 1976, Brooks signed a contract with SSVEC for the extension of electric service to his home. Pursuant to the contract, SSVEC built an extension line to Brooks’ home, charging Brooks a portion of the construction cost. The contract also called for a monthly service availability charge of $6.50 per month, subject to future adjustment if additional customers connected to the extension line. The service availability charge was calculated according to SSVEC’s Tariff 4.17(b), which was authorized by the Commission on November 1, 1976, and reauthorized on June 21, 1982.

Brooks fired the first salvo of his campaign in 1984, when he challenged Tariff 4.17(b) in a complaint filed with the Commission. The Commission dismissed the complaint on the grounds that, under Arizona law,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.