green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
6.1 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1975 ·
…if the commission is now to abandon the treatment historically accorded pipeline-produced gas in rate making on the ground that the ultimate public interest will be better served thereby, the commission should justify it on the record.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1957 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1957
1991
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
PepsiCo, Inc. v. Dunlop Tire & Rubber Corp.
attempt to analogize section 43(a) to a libel action, making proof of actual damages unnecessary, is totally without support in law or reason.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Consumers Union of United States, Inc. v. Federal Power Commission, Tenneco Oil Company, Intervenors. Public Service Commission of the State of New York v. Federal Power Commission, Exxon Corporation, Intervenors. American Public Gas Association v. Federal Power Commission, Public Service Commission of the State of New York, Intervenors
if the commission is now to abandon the treatment historically accorded pipeline-produced gas in rate making on the ground that the ultimate public interest will be better served thereby, the commission should justify it on the record.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Consumers Union of United States, Inc. v. Federal Power Commission
if the commission is now to abandon the treatment historically accorded pipeline-produced gas in rate making on the ground that the ultimate public interest will be better served thereby, the commission should justify it on the record.
cited
Cited "see"
Burndy Corp. v. Teledyne Industries, Inc.
See Gold Seal Co. v. Weeks, 129 F.Supp. 928 (D.D.C.1955), aff'd, 230 F.2d 832 (D.C.Cir. 1956), cert, denied, 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 41 , 1 L.Ed.2d 50 (1957).
discussed
Cited "see"
Alberta Gas Chemicals, Ltd. v. Celanese Corp.
See Nichols v. Alker, 231 F.2d 68, 75 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 42 , 1 L.Ed.2d 51 (1956). 2 The sole issue that would be placed before the state courts under plaintiff’s complaint, or before this Court in diversity, is whether the Commission’s determination was properly reached.
discussed
Cited "see"
Torbert H. MacDonald and Sidney R. Yates v. Federal Power Commission, George Mitchell & Associates, Inc., Etal., Intervenors
See City of Detroit v. FPC, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 260 , 263, 230 F.2d 810, 813 (1955), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 829 (1956); Breyer & MacAvoy, The Natural Gas Shortage and the Regulation of Natural Gas Producers, 86 Harv.L.Rev. 941, 952-953 (1973). . tSee Statement of General Policy, No. 61-1, 24 FPO 818 (I960). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division v. Federal Power Commission
See United Fuel Gas Co., 31 FPC 1342, 1353 (1964); see generally Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co., 13 FPC 53 (1954), reversed on other grounds sub nom., City of Detroit, Michigan v. FPC, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 260 , 230 F.2d 810 (1955), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 34 , 1 L.Ed.2d 48 (1956). 18 Since exhaustion of natural resources has always been an articulated factor in depreciation calculation, and has been utilized in the past in specific factual situations where the Commission thought it appropriate, we do not accept petitioner’s characterization of the Commission Order here as revoluti…
discussed
Cited "see"
Memphis Light, Gas And Water Division v. Federal Power Commission
See United Fuel Gas Co., 31 FPC 1342, 1353 (1964); see generally Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co., 13 FPC 53 (1954), reversed on other grounds sub nom., City of Detroit, Michigan v. FPC, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 260 , 230 F.2d 810 (1955), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 34 , 1 L.Ed.2d 48 (1956). 18 12 Since exhaustion of natural resources has always been an articulated factor in depreciation calculation, and has been utilized in the past in specific factual situations where the Commission thought it appropriate, we do not accept petitioner's characterization of the Commission Order here as revolut…
discussed
Cited "see"
Cities Service Gas Company v. Federal Power Commission
See City of Detroit, Mich. v. Federal Power Commission, 97 U.S. App.D.C. 260, 230 F.2d 810 , cert. denied Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. v. City of Detroit, Mich., 352 U.S. 829 ; 77 S.Ct. 34 , 1 L.Ed.2d 48 ; cf. Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 238 , 252 F.2d 619 , cert. denied 355 U.S. 904 , 78 S.Ct. 331 , 2 L.Ed. 2d 260 ; and Willmut Gas and Oil Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 112 U.S.App.
discussed
Cited "see"
Cities Service Gas Co. v. Federal Power Commission
See City of Detroit, Mich, v. Federal Power Commission, 97 U.S. App.D.C. 260, 230 F.2d 810 , cert. denied Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. v. City of Detroit, Mich., 352 U.S. 829 ; 77 S.Ct. 34 , 1 L.Ed.2d 48 ; cf. Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Federal Power Commission, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 238 , 252 F.2d 619 , cert. denied 355 U.S. 904 , 78 S.Ct. 331 , 2 L.Ed.2d 260 ; and Willmut Gas and Oil Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 112 U.S.App.D.C. 27 , 299 F.2d 111 .
cited
Cited "see"
Koblitz v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
See Nichols v. Alker, 2 Cir., 231 F.2d 68, 79 , certiorari denied 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 42 , 1 L.Ed.2d 51 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Electronics Corporation of America v. Honeywell, Inc.
See, e. g., Gold Seal Co. v. Weeks, D.D.C., 1955, 129 F.Supp. 928 , aff’d, 97 U.S.App.D.C. 282 , 230 F.2d 832 , cert. denied, 1956, 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 41 , 1 L.Ed.2d 50 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Federal Savings & Loan Ins. Corporation v. Szarabajka
Compare Nichols v. Alker, 126 F.Supp. 679 (E.D.N.Y.1954), aff’d, 231 F.2d 68 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 42 , 1 L.Ed.2d 51 (1956), with Crown Kosher Super Market of Mass., Inc. .v.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Citizens TV Protest Committee v. Federal Communications Commission
Compare City of Detroit, Michigan v. Federal Power Comm., 97 U.S.App.D.C. 260 , 230 F.2d 810 (1955), cert. denied, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. v. City of Detroit, Mich., 352 U.S. 829 , 77 S.Ct. 34 , 1 L.Ed.2d 48 (1956); see note 35 supra.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Leslie
v.
Houston Natural Gas Corp.
v.
Houston Natural Gas Corp.
No. 146.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 8, 1956.
Dan Moody and Fred W. Moore for petitioners. Leon Jaworski, John C. White and Milton K. Eckert for respondent.
Published
Citer courts: D.C. Circuit (2) · S.D. New York (1)
Supreme Court of Texas. Certiorari denied.