Legal Opinion · Dissent

Pope v. Intermountain Gas Co.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1982No. 13173, 13436Published

1DissentBistline, Justice

I

The district court found that “Home-guard was wholly financed by Intermountain initially out of its General Fund which included retained earnings from the utility function and from which dividends to Inter-mountain stockholders were to be paid.” In other words, Intermountain was using state sanctioned, essentially guaranteed monopoly dollars to compete in an unregulated *240field.1 I cannot agree with the majority’s approval of this practice. The majority apparently believes that so long as the arena of competition is outside of the “distribution chain” of the monopolized product or service, the…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Otter Tail Power Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. United States v. GriffithSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  3. Higginson v. WestergardIdaho Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Intermountain Gas Co. v. Idaho Public Utilities CommissionIdaho Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Pierson v. SewellIdaho Supreme Court · 1975

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

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

Powered by the Exa API