Legal Opinion
California ex rel. Harris v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 17, 2015No. Nos. 13-71276, 13-71487PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge:
These appeals are the latest in a series of petitions that stem from the energy crisis in California and other western states in 2000 and 2001. The key issue we consider is the applicability of the Mobile-Sierra doctrine, which requires the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) to “presume that the rate set out in a freely negotiated wholesale-energy contract meets the ‘just and reasonable’ requirement” imposed by law. Morgan Stanley Capital Grp., Inc. v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 554 U.S. 527, 530, 128 S.Ct. 2733, 171 L.Ed.2d 607 (2008).
*496Background
The…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Permian Basin Area Rate CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Mobile Gas Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Federal Power Commission v. Metropolitan Edison Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- MPS Merchant Services, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- California Public Utilities Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- California Public Utilities Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Exelon Generation Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016