Legal Opinion

California Public Utilities Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided January 8, 2018No. 16-70481PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

THOMAS, Chief Circuit Judge:

In this petition for review, we consider whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or “Commission”) arbitrarily and capriciously determined that Pacific Gas & Electric Company (“PG&E”) was eligible for an incentive adder for remaining a-member of the . California Independent System Operator Corporation (“Cal-ISO”) when state ■ law prevented PG&E’s departure without authorization. We conclude that it did, and we grant the petition.

I

Section 201 of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”) gives FERC jurisdiction over the rates, terms, and conditions of…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  5. Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2009

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'nCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2019
  2. Julian v. Swift Transp. Co.District Court, D. Arizona · 2018
  3. Earth Island Inst. v. ElliottDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2018
  4. In re Application of Ohio Edison Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  5. Cpuc v. FercCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2022

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API