Legal Opinion
Tenaska Energy, Inc., Tenaska Energy Holdings, LLC, Tenaska Cleburne, LLC, Continental Energy Services, Inc., And Illinova Generating Company v. Ponderosa Pine Energy, Llc
Texas Supreme Court
Decided May 23, 2014No. 12-0789Published
1Opinion of the Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 12-0789 444444444444 TENASKA ENERGY, INC., TENASKA ENERGY HOLDINGS, LLC, TENASKA CLEBURNE, LLC, CONTINENTAL ENERGY SERVICES, INC., AND ILLINOVA GENERATING COMPANY, PETITIONERS, v. PONDEROSA PINE ENERGY, LLC, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 Argued January 7, 2014 JUSTICE GUZMAN delivered the opinion of the Court. Evident partiality of an arbitrator is a ground for vacating an…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McGalliard v. KuhlmannTexas Supreme Court · 1986
- Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Huie v. DeShazoTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- Burlington Northern Railroad v. TUCO Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1997
- Middlesex Mutual Insurance Company v. Stuart LevineCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.