Legal Opinion
Wabash Valley Power Ass'n v. Rural Electrification Administration
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided May 23, 1990No. 89-2482PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge.
Rate regulation for electricity rests on the theory that generating stations and transmission lines are natural monopolies. Unless constrained, suppliers charge monopoly prices in order to satisfy their investors. States hold electric utilities to the cost of service (including a competitive rate of return on invested capital); the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does the same for wholesale electricity transmitted across state borders, preempting state regulation. 16U.S.C. § 824(b); FPCv. Southern California Edison Co., 376 U.S. 205, 84 S.Ct. 644, 11 L.Ed.2d…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Migra v. Warren City School District Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. De La CuestaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Ex Parte TaylorCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2002
- Northeastern Rural Electric Membership Corp. v. Wabash Valley Power Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
- Brighton Village Associates, Herbert F. Gold, Juan M. Cofield, James E. Cofield, Jr., Trustee, and Herbert F. Gold, Trustee v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Erie Insurance Co. v. GeorgeIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- In re Wabash Valley Power Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.