Standing-Judicial Review of PSC Decision

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District I

Case Name: Jerry Friedman v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

Case No.: 2024AP002630

Officials: White, C.J., Donald, and Geenen, JJ.

Focus: Standing-Judicial Review of PSC Decision

The petitioners, neighboring landowners, challenged the PSC’s decision to evaluate an electrical substation project separately from a related transmission line project. They argued that this “segmentation” limited alternative transmission routes and ultimately harmed their properties, which lay along the preferred route for the transmission line. They also raised environmental concerns under the Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act (WEPA).

The court did not reach the merits of these claims, instead holding that the petitioners lacked standing. To establish standing, a party must show a direct injury caused by the challenged agency action. Here, the court found that the petitioners were not harmed by the substation itself, which was located elsewhere. Their alleged injuries stemmed from the separate transmission line project, not from the PSC’s approval of the substation.

The court concluded that the claimed harm was too speculative and attenuated. The connection between approving the substation and any eventual transmission line route depended on uncertain future decisions and assumptions. Such conjectural injuries are insufficient to establish standing.

The court also rejected an undeveloped argument that ratepayer status conferred standing.

Affirmed.

Decided 04/02/26

Full Text