Legal Opinion

Application of Minnegasco

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 29, 1997No. C2-97-8PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUSPENI, Judge.

Relator, a public utility, challenges that portion of respondent’s order after reconsideration in which respondent declined to modify one element of a settlement of a rate case to give effect to a recent Minnesota Supreme Court decision. Because relator, at the time it entered into the settlement, reserved the right to have the supreme court decision applied, we reverse respondent’s order; because respondent has authority to withdraw its approval of the amended settlement, we remand.

FACTS

In relator Minnegasco’s 1993 rate case, respondent Minnesota Public Utilities…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Hoff v. KemptonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  3. Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  4. Application of MinnegascoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  5. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. County of HennepinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Summers v. R & D AGENCY, INC.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
  2. Summers v. R & D AGENCY, INC.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API