ELIZABETHTOWN GAS COMPANY, Petitioner,
v.
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent,
Washington Gas Light Company, Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, Columbia Gas Distributing Companies, Commonwealth Natural Gas Corporation, and General Motors Corporation, Intervenors.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued June 17, 1977.
Decided January 26, 1978.
Rehearing Denied March 24, 1978.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
John T. Miller, Jr., Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
Thomas M. Walsh, Atty., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, for respondent. Drexel D. Journey, Gen. Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Robert W. Perdue, Deputy Gen. Counsel, Allan Abbot Tuttle, Sol., and John H. Burnes, Jr., Atty., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for respondent. John J. Lahey, Atty., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for respondent.
Stephen J. Small, Washington, D. C., with whom Tilford A. Jones, Washington, D. C., was on the brief for intervenor, Columbia Gas Distribution Companies.
Edward J. Grenier, Jr., Richard P. Noland, Robert R. Morrow, Washington, D. C., Frazer F. Hilder and Julius Jay Hollis, Detroit, Mich., were on the brief, for intervenor, General Motors Corp.
John D. Daly, Giles D. H. Snyder, Leonard Sargeant, III, and William P. Saviers, Jr., Charleston, W. Va., were on the brief, for intervenor, Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.
Lewis Carroll, Monte R. Edwards and Susan A. Low, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for intervenor, Washington Gas Light Co.
James O. Watts, Jr., Richmond, Va., entered an appearance for intervenor, Commonwealth Natural Gas Corp.
Before LEVENTHAL and ROBB, Circuit Judges, and RONALD N. DAVIES, Senior United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Opinion for the Court filed by LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge.
LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge.
In this case, we rule that the Federal Power Commission has the power to require compensation as part of a curtailment plan. We remand to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, as the successor to the FPC,** for consideration of whether such compensation should be provided.
The issue arises out of orders of the FPC relating to two successive...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
