. . . .
MCL 462.26(8) provides, "In all appeals under this section the burden of proof shall be upon the appellant to show by clear and satisfactory evidence that the order of the commission complained of is unlawful or unreasonable." To declare a PSC order unlawful, "'there must be a showing that the commission failed to follow some mandatory provision of the statute or was guilty of an abuse of discretion in the exercise of its judgment.'" In re MCI Telecom Complaint, 460 Mich 396, 427; 596 NW2d 164 (1999), quoting Giaras v Mich Pub Serv Comm, 301 Mich 262, 269; 3 NW2d 268 (1942). "The hurdle of unreasonableness is equally high. Within the confines of its jurisdiction, there is a broad range or 'zone' of reasonableness within which the [PSC] may operate." In re MCI Telecom Complaint, 460 Mich at 427, citing Mich Bell Tel Co v Pub Serv Comm, 332 Mich 7, 26-27; 50 NW2d 826 (1952). In addition,
[w]hen considering an agency's statutory construction, the primary question presented is whether the interpretation is consistent with or contrary to the plain language of the statute. While a court must consider an agency's interpretation, the court's ultimate concern is a proper construction of the plain language of the statute.
. . . As established in [Boyer-Campbell Co v Fry, 271 Mich 282; 260 NW 165 (1935)], the agency's interpretation  is entitled to respectful consideration and, if persuasive, should not be overruled without cogent reasons. . . . But, in the end, the agency's interpretation cannot conflict with the plain meaning of the statute. [In re Complaint of Rovas Against SBC Mich, 482 Mich 90, 108; 754 NW2d 259 (2008).]
"In construing administrative rules, courts apply principles of statutory construction." Detroit Base Coalition for the Human Rights of the Handicapped v Dep't of Social Servs, 431 Mich 172, 185; 428 NW2d 335 (1988).
. . . .
Rule 411(2) states that "[e]xisting customers shall not transfer from one utility to another." Mich Admin Code, R 460.3411(2). Rule 411(11) provides that the "first utility serving a customer pursuant to these rules is entitled to serve the entire electric load on the premises of that customer even if another utility is closer to a portion of the customer's load." Mich Admin Code, R 460.3411(11). Rule 411(1)(a) defines "customer" as "the buildings and facilities served rather than the individual, association, partnership, or corporation served." Mich Admin Code, R 460.3411(1)(a). And Mich Admin Code, R 460.3102(j) defines "premises" as "an undivided piece of land that is not separated by public roads, streets, or alleys."
. . . .
Rule 7.212. Briefs
(C) Appellant's Brief; Contents. The appellant's brief must contain, in the following order: . . . .
(3) An index of authorities, listing in alphabetical order all case authorities cited, with the complete citations including the years of decision, and all other authorities cited, with the numbers of the pages where they appear in the brief.
. . . .
(7) The arguments, each portion of which must be prefaced by the principal point stated in capital letters or boldface type. As to each issue, the argument must include a statement of the applicable standard or standards of review and supporting authorities. Facts stated must be supported by specific page references to the transcript, the pleadings, or other document or paper filed with the trial court. Page references to the transcript, the pleadings, or other document or paper filed with the trial court must also be given to show whether the issue was preserved for appeal by appropriate objection or by other means. If determination of the issues presented requires the study of a constitution, statute, ordinance, administrative rule, court rule, rule of evidence, judgment, order, written instrument, or document, or relevant part thereof, this material must be reproduced in the brief or in an addendum to the brief. If an argument is presented concerning the sentence imposed in a criminal case, the appellant's attorney must send a copy of the presentence report to the court at the time the brief is filed;
. . . .
Note: Prior to 2014 a Michigan court rule prescribed a uniform state system of citation. In November 2014 the rule was rescinded and replaced with a manual which sets out “standards for citation of authority, quotation, and style in opinions” of the state’s supreme court and court of appeals. Practitioners are encouraged but not required to adhere to the manual’s standards. See Michigan Appellate Opinion Manual, http://courts.mi.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/Documents/MiAppOpManual.pdf.