Legal Opinion
Mullins v. United States Department of Energy
Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals
Decided April 20, 1992No. 6-40PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Per curiam
The Plaintiffs-Appellants, Robert C. Mullins, d/b/a Clinton Texaco; Edward D. Stokes, d/b/a Ed’s Skyline Texaco; Frank Stone, d/b/a Frank Stone & Son’s; and Rudy Thomas, d/b/a Rudy’s Texaco Service, filed a Complaint against the Defendants alleging that the actions of the Department of Energy (“DOE”) in allocating only $120,000,000 to the Texaco Refined Products Sales Refund Pool from the Texaco consent order deprived the Appellants of their property in violation of the Fifth Amendment and DOE’s regulations, particularly 10 CFR Part 205, Subpart V.
*1150The Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Highland Petroleum, Inc. v. United States Department of EnergyTemporary Emergency Court of Appeals · 1986
3Cited by3 opinions
- Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Consolidated Edison Company Of New York, Inc. v. Bill RichardsonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Mullins v. United States Dept. of EnergyDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1993