Application of Minnegasco
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
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
- Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Hoff v. KemptonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Application of MinnegascoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Montgomery Ward & Co. v. County of HennepinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Summers v. R & D AGENCY, INC.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- Summers v. R & D AGENCY, INC.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999