Case Citator › Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co.

Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
350 U.S. 348
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
36 of 36
Citing cases (total)
36
Treatment dates
2008
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co. remains authoritative for the public interest standard governing changes to regulated power contracts, but a later court declined to extend its rule to Telecommunications Act interconnection agreements. All 36 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The confirmed limitation is listed below; other citing courts applied the contract rule or its public interest standard.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

36 later cases cite Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co.; 36 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Sixth Circuit declined to apply Sierra's protection against unilateral contract changes to interconnection agreements governed by the Telecommunications Act.

    Quick Communications, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Company · Sixth Circuit · filed

    Quick argues that the Commission’s order violated the Sierra-Mobile doctrine established in United Gas Pipe line Co. v. Mobile Gas Service Corp., 350 U.S. 332 (1956), and Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co., 350 U.S. 348 (1956). The Sierra-Mobile doctrine prohibits an agency from allowing regulatees to unilaterally abrogate their private contract by altering their terms. The district court, relying on Bellsouth Telecomm., Inc. v. Miss. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 368 F. Supp.2d 557, 565 n.9 (S.D. Miss. 2005), held that interconnection agreements under the Telecommunications Act are atypical contracts which are the result of state and federal regulations, and thus the Sierra-Mobile doctrine is not applicable. We agree.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace