Legal Opinion
City of Chanute, Kan. v. Williams Natural Gas Co.
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided February 9, 1988No. 87-1463-KPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PATRICK F. KELLY, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, Cities of Chanute, Auburn, Garnett, Humboldt, Iola, Neodesha, and Osage City, Kansas, and Cleveland, Oklahoma (“Cities”), seek an injunction compelling defendant Williams Natural Gas Company (“Williams” or “WNG”) to permanently open access to its interstate natural gas pipeline which is connected to each of the plaintiff Cities. The Cities allege Williams’ failure to open access to its pipeline to alternate suppliers of natural gas constitutes an intentional monopoly in violation of § 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2.
This…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- United States v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Otter Tail Power Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- City of Chanute v. Williams Natural Gas Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
- City of Chanute v. Williams Natural Gas Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- City Of Chanute, Kansue, v. Williams Natural Gas CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
- City Of Chanute, Kansue v. Williams Natural Gas CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- City of Chanute, Kan. v. Williams Natural Gas Co.District Court, D. Kansas · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.