Legal Opinion
In Re Detailing Criteria & Standards for Measuring an Electric Utility's Good Faith Efforts in Meeting the Renewable Energy Objectives Under Minn. Stat. 216B.1691
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 26, 2005No. A04-1742PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WRIGHT, Judge.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) issued an order that set certain objectives for the use of renewable energy resources by electric utilities. On certiora-ri review, relators assert that the PUC committed an error of law by misinterpreting the statute that establishes these objectives. In the alternative, relators argue that the PUC made an arbitrary and capricious decision by adopting inconsistent methods for determining the objectives for biomass energy technologies as compared to all eligible energy technologies. We affirm.
FACTS
In 2001, the Minnesota…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Reserve Mining Co. v. HerbstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- In Re the Excess Surplus Status of Blue Cross & Blue Shield of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Vlahos v. R&I Construction of Bloomington, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Excelsior Energy, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- Kmart Corp. v. County of StearnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- Kmart Corp. v. County of StearnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006