Legal Opinion

In re PUC Docket HP 14-0001

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided June 13, 2018No. 28331, 28332, 28333Published

1Per curiam

[¶1.] TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP (TransCanada) applied to the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission (the Commission) for a permit to construct the Keystone XL Pipeline in South Dakota. Following a contested proceeding, the Commission granted the permit subject to 50 conditions. None of the parties in that proceeding-including Dakota Rural Action, a party to the current appeal-appealed the order issuing a permit. Because TransCanada was unable to commence physical construction within four years, it subsequently certified that it continued to meet the permit conditions as required by…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. Peterson, Ex Rel. Peterson v. BurnsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Goetz v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Valley State Bank of Canton v. Farmers State BankSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Pitt-Hart v. Sanford USD Medical CenterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016

15 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