UNITED STATES GYPSUM, INC. v. INDIANA GAS CO.

No. 93S02-9904-EX-251.

735 N.E.2d 790 (2000)

UNITED STATES GYPSUM, INC.; General Motors Corp.; Reid Hospital & Healthcare Services; Belden Wire & Cable Co.; Eli Lilly & Co.; Knauf Fiber Glass GmbH; Dana Corp.; Aluminum Co. of America; Hayes Wheels Int'l; Thompson Consumer Electronics; Visy Paper, Inc.; Jerome E. Polk; Grant Smith; Julia L. Vaughn; Mark S. Bailey; William G. Simmons; Timothy E. Peterson; Robert V. Benge; Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, Inc.; United Senior Action, Inc.; Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor; and Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp., Appellants (Petitioners and Intervenors below), v. INDIANA GAS CO., INC.; Board of Directors For Utilities of the Dept. of Public Utilities of the City of Indianapolis, as Successor Trustee of a Public Charitable Trust, d/b/a Citizens Gas & Coke Utility; and ProLiance Energy, LLC, Appellees (Respondents below).

Supreme Court of Indiana.

September 22, 2000.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

John F. Wickes, Jr., Todd A. Richardson, Pamela H. Sherwood, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellants United States Gypsum, et al.

Anne E. Becker, Christopher C. Earle, Timothy Stewart, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellants Office of Utility Consumer Counselor.

C. Kirby Mullen, Michael A. Mullett, Reed W. Cearley, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellants Citizens Action Coalition, et al.

L. Parvin Price, George T. Patton, Jr., Jeffrey M. Reed, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellant Enron Capital & Trade.

Ronald E. Christian, Robert E. Heidorn, Daniel W. McGill, Stanley C. Fickle, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee Indiana Gas.

Harry V. Huffman, Michael B. Cracraft, Philip B. McKiernan, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee Citizens Gas & Coke.

Wayne C. Turner, Steven M. Sherman, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee ProLiance Energy.

George A. Porch, Evansville, IN, Peter L. Hatton, Merrillville, IN, Attorneys for Amici Curiae Ohio Valley Gas Corp., et al.


SHEPARD, Chief Justice.

Affiliates of two Indiana natural gas utilities created ProLiance Energy for the purpose of procuring wholesale natural gas supply for the utilities. Opponents complained that ProLiance was an improper attempt to avoid state regulation and petitioned the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission to disapprove ProLiance as against the public interest. The Commission concluded that ProLiance was in the...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases