From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Qwest Corp. v. N.M. Pub. Regulation Comm'n

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Jan 28, 2021
No. S-1-SC-38028 (N.M. Jan. 28, 2021)

Opinion

No. S-1-SC-38028

01-28-2021

QWEST CORPORATION, d/b/a CENTURYLINK QC, Appellant, v. NEW MEXICO PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION, Appellee.

Montgomery and Andrews, P.A. Kari E. Olson Thomas W. Olson Santa Fe, NM for Appellant Russell R. Fisk Santa Fe, NM for Appellee


This decision of the Supreme Court of New Mexico was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Supreme Court.

APPEAL FROM THE NEW MEXICO PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION

Montgomery and Andrews, P.A.
Kari E. Olson
Thomas W. Olson
Santa Fe, NM

for Appellant

Russell R. Fisk
Santa Fe, NM

for Appellee

DISPOSITIONAL ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

VIGIL, Chief Justice.

{1} WHEREAS, this matter comes before this Court for consideration on the appeal of Qwest Corporation, d.b.a. CenturyLink QC (CenturyLink) from the Public Regulation Commission (Commission) October 2019 Order Adopting Quality of Service and Consumer Protection Rules for Large Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Order) in Case No. 17-00186-UT pursuant to Rule 12-601(A) and (B) NMRA, NMSA 1978, Sections 63-9A-14 (1998) and 63-7-1.1(E) (1998);

{2} WHEREAS, every member of this Court having considered the briefs and being otherwise fully informed of the issues and applicable law;

{3} WHEREAS, this Court shall affirm the Commission's Order unless it is "(1) arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion; (2) not supported by substantial evidence in the record; or (3) otherwise not in accordance with law," NMSA 1978, § 63-9A-16 (1998);

{4} WHEREAS, CenturyLink challenges whether the Quality of Service rule, 17.11.24 NMAC, and the Consumer Protection rule, 17.11.25 NMAC, are contrary to law;

{5} WHEREAS, this Court concludes that the challenged rules are in accordance with law and that the Commission acted within its statutory rule-making authority under Article XI, Section 2 of the New Mexico Constitution, NMSA 1978, Section 8-8-4(A) and (B)(5) (1998), and established "reasonable quality of service standards" under its authority, NMSA 1978, Section 63-9A-5(B)(4) (2017);

{6} WHEREAS, CenturyLink challenges whether substantial evidence supports the Commission's Order;

{7} WHEREAS, this Court determines that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the Commission's Order;

{8} WHEREAS, CenturyLink challenges whether the workshop process was arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion;

{9} WHEREAS, this Court holds that the process was not arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion;

{10} WHEREAS, this Court hereby exercises its discretion under Rule 12-405(B)(1) and (2) NMRA to dispose of this case by nonprecedential order rather than a formal opinion;

{11} NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Order of the Commission is affirmed.

{12} IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Justice

BARBARA J. VIGIL, Justice

C. SHANNON BACON, Justice

DAVID K. THOMSON, Justice


Summaries of

Qwest Corp. v. N.M. Pub. Regulation Comm'n

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Jan 28, 2021
No. S-1-SC-38028 (N.M. Jan. 28, 2021)
Case details for

Qwest Corp. v. N.M. Pub. Regulation Comm'n

Case Details

Full title:QWEST CORPORATION, d/b/a CENTURYLINK QC, Appellant, v. NEW MEXICO PUBLIC…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

Date published: Jan 28, 2021

Citations

No. S-1-SC-38028 (N.M. Jan. 28, 2021)