California v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Good Law
383 F.3d 1006·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 18989
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 9, 200402-73093California5,956 words

Opinion

Opinion

383 F.3d 1006 State of CALIFORNIA, ex rel. Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Petitioner, Coral Power, LLC; Duke Energy North America, LLC; Duke Energy Trading And Marketing, LLC; Transcanada Energy Ltd.; City of Tacoma, Washington; Portland General Electric Company; Dynegy Power Marketing, Inc.; El Segundo Power LLC, Long Beach Generation LLC; Cabrillo Power I LLC; Cabrillo Power II LLC; Mirant Americas Energy Marketing LP; Mirant California, LLC; Mirant Delta, LLC; Mirant Potrero, LLC; Public Service Company of New Mexico; El Paso Merchant Energy LP; BP Energy Co.; Public Service Company of Colorado; Pinnacle West Capital Corporation; Arizona Public Service Co.; Pacificorp; Pacificorp Power Marketing, Inc.; Strategic Energy LLC, Intervenors, Morgan Stanley Capital Group, Inc., Respondent-Intervenor, AES Companies; Reliant Energy Services, Inc.; Enron Power Marketing, Inc.; Enron Energy Services, Inc., Intervenors, Powerex Corp.; Puget Sound Energy; Avista Energy, Inc.; Sempra Energy Trading Corp., Sempra Energy Solutions; Sempra Energy Resources, Respondents-Intervenors, California Public Utilities Commission, Petitioner-Intervenor, Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Company,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.