In a petition for review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) order increasing the permissible return on equity for a regional organization of transmission owners, the petition is denied where: 1) nothing in the law or FERC’s stated purposes required FERC to adduce evidence that the order would produce new transmission investment; and 2) FERC adduced substantial evidence for the proposition that the incentive was likely to increase the speed with which projects were completed.
Read Connecticut Dep’t of Pub. Util. Control v. FERC, No. 08-1199
Appellate Information
Argued December 8, 2009
Decided January 29, 2010
Judges
Opinion by Judge Williams
Counsel
For Petitioners:
Randall L. Speck, Harvey L. Reiter, and Michael C. Wertheimer, Assistant Attorneys General,Attorney General’s Office of the State of Connecticut, Hartford, CT
Lona T. Perry and Cynthia A. Marlette, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
