Grindsted Products, Inc. v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n
Supreme Court of Kansas
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Lockett, J.:
Plaintiff manufacturer claimed that it was eligible for economic development discounts in the price of electricity purchased from defendant public utility for electric service to a manufacturing plant. The defendant regulatory agency determined that (1) the manufacturer was not eligible for the economic development tariff; (2) the utility had no affirmative duty to disclose the economic development tariff to the manufacturer; and (3) no discrimination occurred. The district court granted the utility’s motion to dismiss, finding that the…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Chicago & Alton Railroad v. KirbySupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Hughes Aircraft Company National Union Fire Insurance Company v. North American Van Lines, Inc., and Does 1-100, InclusiveCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Warner v. Southwestern Bell Telephone CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1968
- The Coca-Cola Company v. The Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
- Turner, Dennis & Lowry Lumber Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Miller v. Sloan, Listrom, Eisenbarth, Sloan & GlassmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1999
- Droge v. RempelCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2008
- In Re the Appeal of United Teleservices, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1999
- Jp Morgan Trust Co. Nat. v. Mid-America PipelineDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2006
- Amundson & Associates Art Studio, Ltd. v. National Council on Compensation InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1999
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.