Legal Opinion
Cities of Anaheim, Riverside, Banning, Colton, & Azusa, California v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided August 20, 1991No. Nos. 90-1236, 90-1369, 90-1515 and 90-1566PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge BUCKLEY.
BUCKLEY, Circuit Judge:
Over the past fifteen years, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“Commission” or “FERC”) has developed rules for adjudicating allegations of “price squeeze.” Price squeeze is a quasi-antitrust concept; it refers to an unjustified disparity between a public utility’s wholesale and retail electric power rates (“price discrimination”) that harms the ability of wholesale customers to compete with the utility in the retail market. These cases require us to review important aspects of the Commission’s price squeeze…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Brown Shoe Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Federal Trade Commission v. Morton Salt Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Corn Products Refining Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Federal Power Commission v. Conway Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Covad Communications Co. v. BellSouth Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
- Cities Of Anaheim v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- South Dakota Public Utilities Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991