Cluster 473092

Energy Regu latory Comm’n, 795 F.2d 816, 818 (9th Cir.1986)).

The Tucker Act’s grant of jurisdiction to the Court of Federal Claims is frequently referred to as “exclusive,” but “that court’s jurisdiction is ‘exclusive’ only to the extent that Congress has not granted any other court authority to hear the claims that may be decided by the Claims Court.” Bowen v. Massachusetts, 487 U.S. 879 , 910 n. 48, 108 S.Ct. 2722 , 101 L.Ed.2d 749 (1988). “[C]ourts have referred to the Tucker Act’s grant of exclusive jurisdiction as a shorthand way…

The Tucker Act’s grant of jurisdiction to the Court of Federal Claims is fre- quently referred to as “exclusive,” but “that court’s jurisdic- tion is ‘exclusive’ only to the extent that Congress has not granted any other court authority to hear the claims that may be decided by the Claims Court.” Bowen v. Massachusetts, 487 U.S. 879 , 910 n.48 (1988). “[C]ourts have referred to the Tucker Act’s grant of exclusive jurisdiction as a shorthand way of recognizing that Congress h…

The IOUs challenged the 1984 methodology, but we upheld FERC’s decision in Pacificorp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 821 (9th Cir.1986), and the 1984 methodology remains the approved means for determining an ASC.

We have previously held that rate determinations are not “deemed final” “until FERC denied the petitioners’ petition for rehearing.” Pacifi- Corp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 820 (9th Cir. 1986); see also Wash. Utilities & Transp.

The IOUs challenged the 1984 method- ology, but we upheld FERC’s decision in Pacificorp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 821 (9th Cir. 1986), and the 1984 methodology remains the approved means for determining an ASC.

PacifiCorp v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 795 F.2d 816, 820 (9th Cir.1986).

PacifiCorp v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 795 F.2d 816, 820 (9th Cir.1986).

As Judge Wallace has observed, Munoz established the principle that "jurisdiction under the Tucker Act is not exclusive where other statutes independently confer jurisdiction and waive sovereign immunity." Pacificorp v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 795 F.2d 816, 826 (9th Cir.1986) (Wallace, J., concurring). 4 The government argues that Munoz is no longer good law because it was implicitly overruled by the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), 41 U.S.C.

As Judge Wallace has observed, Munoz established the principle that “jurisdiction under the Tucker Act is not exclusive where other statutes independently confer jurisdiction and waive sovereign immunity.” Pacificorp v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 795 F.2d 816, 826 (9th Cir.1986) (Wallace, J., concurring). 4 The government argues that Munoz is no longer good law because it was implicitly overruled by the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), 41 U.S.C. § 601 et seq., 5 which Con…

Comm'n v. Johnson, 807 F.2d 1456 , 1459-60 (9th Cir.1986); Pacificorp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 818 (9th Cir.1986).

Comm’n v. Johnson, 807 F.2d 1456 , 1459—60 (9th Cir.1986); Pacificorp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 818 (9th Cir.1986).

See Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Bonneville Power Administration, 818 F.2d 701, 705 (9th Cir.1987) (reviewing claim that customer charge imposed in 1983 rates constituted a breach of contract); Pacificorp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 818-20 (9th Cir.1986) (court of appeals had jurisdiction to review BPA’s revision of cost methodology, although claim was characterized as one for breach of contract).

See Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Bonneville Power Administration, 818 F.2d 701, 705 (9th Cir.1987) (reviewing claim that customer charge imposed in 1983 rates constituted a breach of contract); Pacificorp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 818-20 (9th Cir.1986) (court of appeals had jurisdiction to review BPA's revision of cost methodology, although claim was characterized as one for breach of contract). 10 Our recent decision in Public Utility Dist.

Cf. Van Drasek v. Lehman, 762 F.2d 1065 , 1071 and n. 10 (D.C.Cir.1985); Munoz v. Small Business Administration, 644 F.2d 1361, 1364 (9th Cir.1981); Pacificorp. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 795 F.2d 816, 826 (9th Cir.1986) (concurring opinion). 4 The bank named as additional defendants the Hutchinsons, who had also guaranteed the loan, and who now counterclaimed against the bank for $150,000, the amount they claimed to be owed by virtue of their second agreement with…

See also Atlantic Richfield Co., 818 F.2d at 705 (Ninth Circuit had jurisdiction over claim denominated breach of contract because claim challenged ratemaking); Pacificorp, 795 F.2d at 820 (same); City of Seattle v. Johnson, 813 F.2d 1364, 1368 (9th Cir.1987) (same).

See also Atlantic Richfield Co., 818 F.2d at 705 (Ninth Circuit had jurisdiction over claim denominated breach of contract because claim challenged ratemaking); Pacificorp, 795 F.2d at 820 (same); City of Seattle v. Johnson, 813 F.2d 1364, 1368 (9th Cir.1987) (same). 17 In this case, however, the principal conduct of the agency on which petitioner's claim is based is not final action taken pursuant to statutory authority; it is alleged contractual commitments made outside th…

Cf. Van Drasek v. Lehman, 762 F.2d 1065 , 1071 and n. 10 (D.C.Cir.1985); Munoz v. Small Business Administration, 644 F.2d 1361, 1364 (9th Cir.1981); Pacificorp. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 795 F.2d 816, 826 (9th Cir.1986) (concurring opinion).

Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 795 F.2d 816, 818 (9th Cir.1986).

Although PLI can maintain claims in this Court against the United States for equitable subordination and for offset up to $2,210,534.68, see Pacificorp v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 795 F.2d 816, 826 (9th Cir.1986) (Wallace, J., concurring in part) (“jurisdiction under the Tucker Act is not exclusive where other statutes independently confer jurisdiction and waive sovereign immunity”); Munoz v. Small Business Administration, 644 F.2d 1361, 1364-65 (9th Cir.1981); …

C., 795 F.2d 816, 825 (9th Cir.1986).

Pacificorp v. F.E.R.C., 795 F.2d 816, 825 (9th Cir.1986).

See Pacificorp v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 818 (9th Cir.1986); Pub.

See Pacificorp. v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 826 (9th Cir.1986) (Wallace, J., concurring in part); Bor-Son Building Corp. v. Heller, 572 F.2d 174 , 182 n. 14 (8th Cir.1978). .

See Pacificorp. v. FERC, 795 F.2d 816, 826 (9th Cir.1986) (Wallace, J., concurring in part); Bor-Son Building Corp. v. Heller, 572 F.2d 174 , 182 n. 14 (8th Cir.1978) 5 We are aware that the D.C.

See Pacificorp. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 795 F.2d 816 (9th Cir. filed this date.) Permitting district court jurisdiction over interlocutory decisions by BPA, but requiring Ninth Circuit jurisdiction over final BPA actions would frustrate the legislative intent to expedite review of BPA decisions.

See Pacificorp. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 795 F.2d 816 (9th Cir. filed this date.) 15 Permitting district court jurisdiction over interlocutory decisions by BPA, but requiring Ninth Circuit jurisdiction over final BPA actions would frustrate the legislative intent to expedite review of BPA decisions.