Legal Opinion
California ex rel Lockyer v. Dynegy, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 6, 2004No. Nos. 02-16619, 03-15588, 02-16625, 02-16629PublishedCited by 403 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge:
We must decide whether federal removal jurisdiction lies over California state court actions alleging that several power companies fraudulently failed to deliver reserve energy that might otherwise have helped to avert the state’s energy crises of 2000 and 2001.
*835I
Far-reaching economic and regulatory changes in one of the largest electric éner-gy markets in the world provide the backdrop to this litigation. We begin with some context necessary to understanding the legal claims before us.
A
California adopted an energy policy in the mid-1990s that broke new ground in…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by403 opinions
- Provincial Gov't of Marinduque v. Placer Dome, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Karen Hansen v. Group Health CooperativeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- California v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Academy of Country Music v. Continental Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- Central Iowa Power Cooperative v. Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
398 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.