Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

California Vs. Ferc

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 21, 1990

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

47 entries 2 linked 45 unlinked
Show
  1. First Iowa Hydro-electric Cooperative Vs. Fpc US Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1946
    Relied / Followed
  2. Fpc Vs. Oregon US Supreme Court · Jun 06, 1955
  3. U.S. 490 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court California v. FERC
    Search
  4. U.S. 490 (1990) California v. Federal
    Search
  5. a veto power over federal projects inconsistent with the FPA, as interpreted in First Iowa Hydro-Electric Cooperative v. FPC
    Search
  6. has been endorsed, see FPC v. Oregon
    Search
  7. and federal authorities over the same subject matter. Pp. 495 U. S. 500 -503. (c) Although California v. United
    Search
  8. Page 495 U. S. 496 projects inconsistent with the FPA, as interpreted in First Iowa Hydro-Electric Cooperative v. FPC
    Search
  9. Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed FERC's order denying rehearing. California ex rel. State Water Resources Board v. FERC
    Search
  10. California v. ARC
    Search
  11. America Corp., 490 U. S. 93 , 490 U. S. 101 (1989), quoting Rice v. Santa
    Search
  12. California v. United
    Search
  13. Fullerton v. State
    Search
  14. California Trout, Inc. v. State
    Search
  15. Patterson v. McLean
    Search
  16. FPC v. Oregon
    Search
  17. FPC v. Niagara
    Search
  18. with approval in a range of decisions, both addressing the FPA and in other contexts. See, e.g., New England Power Co. v. New
    Search
  19. City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers
    Search
  20. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State
    Search
  21. Square D Co. v. Niagara
    Search
  22. quoting Burnet v. Coronado
    Search
  23. be limited correspondingly. Petitioner also argues that our decision in California v. United
    Search
  24. that this Court in California v. United
    Search
  25. Page 495 U. S. 504 California v. United
    Search
  26. Iowa, but that decision bears quite indirectly, at best, upon interpretation of the FPA. The Court in California v. United
    Search
  27. with congressional directives, governing use of water employed in federal reclamation projects. California v. United
    Search
  28. States, supra. Also, as in First Iowa, the Court in California v. United
    Search
  29. ed.), and California v. United
    Search
  30. U.S. at 438 U. S. 650 , 438 U. S. 664 -665, 438 U. S. 674 -675. Although California v. United
    Search
  31. Given these differences between the statutes and saving provisions, it should come as no surprise that California v. United
    Search
  32. or to First Iowa. Since the Court decided California v. United
    Search
  33. New England Power Co., 455 U.S. at 455 U. S. 338 , n. 6. We do not believe that California v. United
    Search
  34. Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee
    Search
  35. U.S. Supreme Court California v. FERC
    Search
  36. California v. Federal
    Search
  37. Although California v. United
    Search
  38. State Water Resources Board v. FERC
    Search
  39. Rice v. Santa
    Search
  40. California v. United
    Search
  41. Fullerton v. State
    Search
  42. California Trout, Inc. v. State
    Search
  43. FPC v. Niagara
    Search
  44. New England Power Co. v. New
    Search
  45. Square D Co. v. Niagara
    Search
  46. Burnet v. Coronado
    Search
  47. and California v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial