Ohio Power Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s Empirical Analysis
880 F.2d 1400 · 1989
Citation profile
9 federal appellate ·
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 79 (Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935) · 16 U.S.C. § 824 (§ 201 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 824E (§ 206 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 825Q (§ 318 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 42 U.S.C. § 7172
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Federal Power Commission v. Texaco Inc. · State of Missouri Southwestern Bell Telephone Co v. Public Service Commission of Missouri · Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. Thornburg · Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Mississippi Ex Rel. Moore
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Id. at 1414. We now adopt Judge Mikva's approach as reflecting the view of this panel. 15 Section 35.14(a)(7) addresses fuel price adjustment clauses in filed rate schedules, and provides in pertinent part: 16 Where the utility purchases fuel from a company-owned or controlled source, the price of which is subject to the jurisdiction of a regulatory body, such cost shall be deemed to be reasonable and includable in the adjustment clause. 17 18 C.F.R. § 35.14(a)(7). The dispute here focuses on the meaning of the word”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Although, as a general matter, FERC may have the authority to make an independent determination of reasonableness, section 35.14(a)(7) forecloses such a route to the extent that the price is already subject to the jurisdiction of another regulatory body. In other words, section 35.14(a)(7) establishes, as a policy matter, that if another regulatory body has already passed on the fuel price, then FERC will abide by that determination. This reading is entirely consistent with the purpose of section 35.14(a)(7), which is to avoid unreasonable fuel costs between affiliated companies, for if another agency (e.g., the SEC) has already made that determination, then there is no reason for FERC to second-guess that decision.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“with respect to the same subject matter.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.