CHEMICAL BANK, Appellant,
v.
WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM, Appellant, PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL, Respondents.
The Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
November 6, 1984.
November 6, 1984.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Betts, Patterson & Mines, P.S., by Michael Mines (Robert F. Mullen, Ralph L. McAfee, Richard S. Simmons, and Cravath, Swaine & Moore, of counsel), for appellant Chemical Bank.
Culp, Dwyer, Guterson & Grader, by Richard C. Yarmuth, Michele Coad, Robert O. Marritz, and Earle J. Hereford, Jr., for appellant Washington Public Power Supply System.
Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell, Malanca, Peterson & O'Hern, by Albert R. Malanca, Kenneth G. Kieffer, and Donald S. Cohen, for respondent Washington Public Utilities Group.
Helsell, Fetterman, Martin, Todd & Hokanson, by Richard S. White, David F. Jurca, and Linda J. Cochran, for respondents Columbia Rural Electric Association, Inc., et al.
Stimson Bullitt, John D. Lowery, and Thomas W. Burt (of Riddell, Williams, Bullitt & Walkinshaw), for 21 respondents.
Jones, Grey & Bayley, P.S., by Hugo E. Oswald, Jr., Margaret A. Pageler, Richard L. Goldfarb, and James A. Miller; George F. Hanigan; and James P. McNally and McNally & Stewart, for respondents City of Ellensburg, et al.
Lane, Powell, Moss & Miller, by John R. Tomlinson, H. Peter Sorg, Jr., and Timothy F. Brown, for respondents Oregon PUD's.
Hillis, Phillips, Cairncross, Clark & Martin, P.S., and Jerome L. Hillis, Michael F. Schumacher, and Gregory E. Keller, for 9 respondents.
Dwight A. Halstead and Halstead & Ingvalson, for respondent Benton Rural Electric Association.
Brown, Thayer & Drummond, by Robert M. Brown, for respondent Inland Power and Light Co.
Thoreson, Berry, Yost & Matthews and Ernest C. Matthews IV (Robert H. Jaffe and Jaffe & Schlesinger, of counsel), for intervenors.
John R. Allison, Sharon S. Armstrong, and Alan P. Sherbrooke on behalf of the City of Seattle, amici curiae.
Michael D. McKay and Charles Webb III on behalf of National WPPSS 4 and 5 Bondholders Committee, amici curiae.
The Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.
ROSELLINI, J.
This case first came before our court in Chemical Bank v. WPPSS,99 Wn.2d 772, 666 P.2d 329 (1983) (Chemical Bank I) for resolution of the issue of whether 28 municipalities and public utility districts (PUD's) had statutory authority to enter into agreements to build Washington nuclear plants (WNP) 4 and 5. We held that no statutory authority, express or implied, existed...
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.
