Case over frozen-to-death Ohio woman should be heard by utility regulators, court holds
By Clark Mindock
May 24 (Reuters) -Ohio's top court ruled on Friday that the brother of a woman who froze to death after her gas service was cut off by a utility now owned by Enbridge ENB.TO must pursue wrongful death claims before the state's utility commission, not a trial court.
The Ohio Supreme Court held that the case over 81-year-old Virginia Vigrass' 2022 death must first go before the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio since it relates to actions that are normally authorized as a part of ordinary utility services.
The unanimous seven-justice court said Ohio law requires people to first file complaints with the commission alleging that a public utility's services have violated the law, if the actions relate to a utility’s rates and services.
Since the decision to shut off the Lakewood woman's gas falls under that umbrella, the utility commission must first hear the case filed against the utility, East Ohio Gas Company, before deciding whether to send it to a court, the justices held.
Enbridge acquired the utility from Dominion Energy D.N earlier this year. The companies and counsel for the woman's brother, J. William Vigrass, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The underlying lawsuit claims the utility disconnected natural gas service to the residence of Vigrass in January 2022 after the company repeatedly asked for access to her meter over months, despite her accounting being paid in full.
Vigrass refused access because she was immunocompromised and susceptible to the risks of COVID-19, but had sent some letters to the company in response to their requests, according to the lawsuit.
Frigid temperatures inside the residence after the gas shutoff caused water pipes to burst. Water then flooded the residence and froze. Police found Vigrass dead and frozen to the floor 19 days after the gas was disconnected.
Her brother sued the utility on behalf of her estate in Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
Judge Peter Corrigan rejected a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, reasoning that he has jurisdiction over the complaint because the complaint asserted common-law claims of negligence, destruction of property and wrongful death.
The utility on appeal argued Corrigan incorrectly asserted jurisdiction in the case.
The case is East Ohio Gas Company DBA Dominion Energy Ohio v. Corrigan, Judge, Ohio Supreme Court, No. 2024-Ohio-1960.
For the utility: Matthew Rechner and Adam Smith of McDonald Hopkins
For the judge: Michael O'Malley of the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's Office
For the estate: Mark Abramowitz and Nicholas Horattas of DiCello Levitt
Reporting by Clark Mindock; editing by Nate Raymond
免責聲明: XM Group提供線上交易平台的登入和執行服務，允許個人查看和/或使用網站所提供的內容，但不進行任何更改或擴展其服務和訪問權限，並受以下條款與條例約束：（i）條款與條例；（ii）風險提示；（iii）完全免責聲明。網站內部所提供的所有資訊，僅限於一般資訊用途。請注意，我們所有的線上交易平台內容並不構成，也不被視為進入金融市場交易的邀約或邀請 。金融市場交易會對您的投資帶來重大風險。
所有缐上交易平台所發佈的資料，僅適用於教育/資訊類用途，不包含也不應被視爲適用於金融、投資稅或交易相關諮詢和建議，或是交易價格紀錄，或是任何金融商品或非應邀途徑的金融相關優惠的交易邀約或邀請。
本網站的所有XM和第三方所提供的内容，包括意見、新聞、研究、分析、價格其他資訊和第三方網站鏈接，皆爲‘按原狀’，並作爲一般市場評論所提供，而非投資建議。請理解和接受，所有被歸類為投資研究範圍的相關内容，並非爲了促進投資研究獨立性，而根據法律要求所編寫，而是被視爲符合營銷傳播相關法律與法規所編寫的内容。請確保您已詳讀並完全理解我們的非獨立投資研究提示和風險提示資訊，相關詳情請點擊 這裡查看。
