DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecommunications & Energy

12 Citing cases

  1. Mass. Elec. Co. v. Dep't of Pub. Utilities. Nstar Elec. Co.

    469 Mass. 553 (Mass. 2014)   Cited 3 times

    ” Bay State Gas Co. v. Department of Pub. Utils., 459 Mass. 807, 813–814, 947 N.E.2d 1077 (2011), quoting DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. & Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 603, 870 N.E.2d 1096 (2007). 1. Prudence versus reasonableness standard.

  2. Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, Inc. v. Dep't of Pub. Utilities

    461 Mass. 166 (Mass. 2011)   Cited 27 times
    Noting that “[t]he constitutional challenge advanced by the Alliance and TransCanada fails”

    Review of the department's decision is governed by G.L. c. 25, § 5. “The burden of proof is on the appealing part[ies] to show that the order appealed from is invalid, and we have observed that this burden is heavy.... Moreover, we give deference to the department's expertise and experience in areas where the Legislature has delegated to it decision-making authority, pursuant to G.L. c. 30A, § 14.” DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. & Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 603, 870 N.E.2d 1096 (2007), quoting Massachusetts Inst. of Tech. v. Department of Pub. Utils., 425 Mass. 856, 867–868, 684 N.E.2d 585 (1997). We consider separately below each claim raised by the interveners.

  3. Attorney General v. Dept. of Public Utilities

    453 Mass. 191 (Mass. 2009)   Cited 7 times

    Tariffs are documents that set out the terms and conditions of the utility's services and rates. See DSC1 Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 600 n. 5 (2007). See also Fitchburg Gas Elec. Light Co., D.P.U. 07-71 (2008).

  4. Zoning Bd. App. Canton v. Housing App. Com

    76 Mass. App. Ct. 467 (Mass. App. Ct. 2010)   Cited 6 times

    The board, as the appealing party, has the "heavy" burden of showing that the agency decision of the HAC is not supported by substantial evidence. DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 603 (2007). We are required to "give due weight to the experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge of the agency, as well as to the discretionary authority conferred upon it" by statute.

  5. Energy Express, Inc. v. Dep't of Pub. Utilits.

    477 Mass. 571 (Mass. 2017)   Cited 1 times

    When reviewing a decision of the department that does not raise a constitutional question, but is limited to evaluating whether the department committed legal error, "[t]he burden of proof is on the appealing party to show that the order appealed from is invalid, and we have observed that this burden is heavy." Bay State Gas Co . v. Department of Pub. Utils ., 459 Mass. 807, 813, 947 N.E.2d 1077 (2011), quoting DSCI Corp . v. Department of Telecomm. & Energy , 449 Mass. 597, 603, 870 N.E.2d 1096 (2007). We afford the department deference, based on its "expertise and experience in areas where the Legislature has delegated decision-making authority" to the department.

  6. Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Bd.

    10-P-2013 (Mass. Mar. 9, 2012)

    Doe asserts insufficiency of the evidence, claiming that the hearing examiner's decision is 'contrary to common sense' and 'lacks a basis of reasonable expectations.' Doe, 'as the appealing party, has the 'heavy' burden of showing that the agency decision . . . is not supported by substantial evidence.' Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Canton v. Housing Appeals Comm., 76 Mass. App. Ct. 467, 472 (2010), quoting from DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. & Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 603 (2007). 'Substantial evidence is 'such evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. No. 10216 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 447 Mass. 779, 787 (2006), quoting from G. L. c. 30A, § 1(6). 'This standard is highly deferential to an agency . . . .' Ten Local Citizen Group v. New England Wind, LLC, 457 Mass. 222, 228 (2010).

  7. Bay State Gas Co. v. Dept. of Public Utilities

    459 Mass. 807 (Mass. 2011)   Cited 10 times

    " DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 603 (2007), quoting Massachusetts Inst. of Tech. v. Department of Pub. Utils., 425 Mass. 856, 867-868 (1997). Public utilities may "charge rates which are compensatory with the full cost incurred by efficient management, [but] they may not recover costs which are excessive, unwarranted, or incurred in bad faith."

  8. Ten Local Cit. Grp. v. New Eng. Wind

    457 Mass. 222 (Mass. 2010)   Cited 57 times
    Declining to consider argument where plaintiffs raised it only in their complaint and then in footnote in reply memorandum, and where plaintiffs did not ask judge to reconsider issue when his decision did not address it

    In determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the department's decision, ‘ we must carefully consider any evidence in the record that detracts from the agency's conclusion, [and] " accord due weight to the ‘ experience, technical competence and specialized knowledge’ of the department." ' " DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. & Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 606, 870 N.E.2d 1096 (2007), quoting Boston Gas Co. v. Department of Telecomm. & Energy, 436 Mass. 233, 237, 763 N.E.2d 1045 (2002). " A court may not displace an [agency's] choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo.

  9. Chhan v. Sec'y of the Exec. Office of Health & Human Servs.

    No. 22-P-1068 (Mass. App. Ct. Dec. 14, 2023)

    "An agency decision will be upheld 'unless it is based on an error of law, unsupported by substantial evidence, unwarranted by facts found on the record as submitted, arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.'" Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Canton v. Housing Appeals Comm., 76 Mass.App.Ct. 467, 473 (2010), quoting DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecomm. & Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 603 (2007). See G. L. c. 30A, § 14 (7).

  10. Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Bd.

    13-P-1187 (Mass. App. Ct. Dec. 19, 2014)

    On appeal, however, the plaintiff "has the 'heavy' burden of showing that the agency decision . . . is not supported by substantial evidence." Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Canton v. Housing Appeals Comm., 76 Mass. App. Ct. 467, 472-473 (2010), quoting from DSCI Corp. v. Department of Telecommunication & Energy, 449 Mass. 597, 603 (2007). "Substantial evidence is 'such evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.'" Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. No. 10216 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 447 Mass. 779, 787 (2006) (Doe, No. 10216), quoting from G. L. c. 30A, § 1 (6). "This standard is highly deferential to an agency . . . .