Citation network
New York Vs. Ferc
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 04, 2002
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
-
In the Supreme Court of the United States at October Term, 2001 Syllabus New York Et Al. V. FederalSearch
-
Enron Power Marketing, Inc. v. FederalSearch
-
has changed since the FPA was enacted, at which time the electricity universe was neatly divided into spheres ofretail v. wholesaleSearch
-
State could regulate direct sales to consumers even when the gas was drawn from interstate mains, Pennsylvania Gas Co. v. PublicSearch
-
Public Util. Comm'n of R. 1. v. AttleboroSearch
-
Gulf States Util. Co. v. FPCSearch
-
the sale of electric energy at wholesale in inter- Kan. v. LandonSearch
-
state producers was sold to independent distributing companies for resale to local consumers, Missouri ex rel. Barrett v. KansasSearch
-
Transmission Access Policy Study Group v. FERCSearch
-
F. P. C. 544,549 (1967). This Court found the FPC's findings sufficient to establish the FPC's jurisdiction. FPC v. FloridaSearch
-
more detail below, the Government has also used the antitrust laws to this end. For example, in Otter Tail Power Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
precedent-primarily cases involving the transmission of natural gas, e. g., Associated Gas Distributors v. FERCSearch
-
Federal v. StateSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
S. A. Inc. 10 See FPC v. FloridaSearch
-
Jersey Central Power & Light Co. v. FPCSearch
-
U. S. 61 (1943). 16 v. NaturalSearch
-
transmissions on the interconnected national grids constitute transmissions in interstate commerce. See, e. g., FPC v. FloridaSearch
-
neatly divided into spheres of retail v. wholesaleSearch
-
cf. FPC v. LouisianaSearch
-
displaced by, 18 the existence of Federal Government authority. See, e. g., Hillsborough County v. AutomatedSearch
-
see also Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSearch
-
Cipollone v. LiggettSearch
-
Hillsborough County, 471 U. S., at 715 (quoting Jones v. RathSearch
-
Louisiana Pub. Servo Comm'n v. FCCSearch
-
FPC v. SouthernSearch
-
Cal. Edison Co., 376 U. S. 205 , 215 (1964) (quoting Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. FPCSearch
-
see also United States v. PublicSearch
-
by New York are properly addressed to the Commission or to the Congress, not to this Court. E. g., Chemehuevi Tribe v. FPCSearch
-
the Commission made a permissible policy choice, ante, at 28 (quoting Transmission Access Policy Study Group v. FERCSearch
-
Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. StateSearch
-
u. S. A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
because it determined that resolving this question was too difficult. Thus, while under Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
the Court fails to place any weight on the fact that the agency presented inconsistent positions. See United States v. MeadSearch
-
see Northern States Power Co. v. FERCSearch
-
Syllabus New York Et Al. V. FederalSearch
-
Enron Power Marketing, Inc. v. FederalSearch
-
Pennsylvania Gas Co. v. PublicSearch
-
Kan. v. LandonSearch
-
Barrett v. KansasSearch
-
FPC v. FloridaSearch
-
Otter Tail Power Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Associated Gas Distributors v. FERCSearch
-
See FPC v. FloridaSearch
-
FPC v. LouisianaSearch
-
Hillsborough County v. AutomatedSearch
-
Jones v. RathSearch
-
Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. FPCSearch
-
United States v. PublicSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial