Amerada Hess Pipeline Corporation v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Mapco Alaska Petroleum Inc., Intervenors
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
SENTELLE, Circuit Judge:
A group of oil pipeline carriers petitions for review of a decision of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”. or the “Commission”). . The decision rejected a filing by the carriers seeking a rate increase because of the inclusion of litigation and settlement costs in the carriers’ tariffs. Tariff rates for the carriers are governed by a settlement agreement between the carriers and the State of Alaska. FERC determined that litigation and settlement costs incurred by the carriers in connection with the Exxon Valdez oil spill were “extraordinary expenses”…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Martin v. Occupational Safety & Health Review CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- American Bankers Ass'n v. National Credit Union AdministrationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1999
- Ganino v. Citizens Utilities Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Ganino v. Citizens Utilities Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Secretary of Labor, Mine Safety & Health Administration v. Excel Mining, LLCCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2003
- Lomak Petroleum, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.