In Re Review of the 2005 Annual Automatic Adjustment of Charges for All Electric & Gas Utilities
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JOHNSON, Judge.
Due to inadvertence, CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas failed to properly account for approximately $28 million in purchases of natural gas that was delivered to Minnesota customers over a five-year period. Although CenterPoint is permitted to recover its gas costs from consumers on a dollar-for-dollar, pass-through basis, Cen-terPoint did not recover that portion of its gas-acquisition costs during the five-year period because of its accounting errors. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission generally permits a utility to recover pass-through costs for only the most…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Wichita Board of TradeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Yueh-Shaio YangSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Edwin I. Hatch v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Avon Township v. State Boundary CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1980
- In Re the Review of the 2005 Annual Automatic Adjustment of Charges for All Electric & Gas UtilitiesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
- In Re the Review of the 2005 Annual Automatic Adjustment of Charges for All Electric & Gas UtilitiesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
- In Re the Review of the 2005 Annual Automatic Adjustment of Charges for All Electric & Gas UtilitiesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009