Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Appalachian Power Company v. FERC
as 23-1192
Petitioner:
APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Intervenor:
BLUE RIDGE POWER AGENCY
PK Ventures I Limited Partners v. FERC
as 20-1671
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Petitioner:
PK VENTURES I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
NC Dept of Environmental v. FERC
as 20-1655
Petitioner:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Orus Berkley v. Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC
as 18-1042
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ORUS ASHBY BERKLEY, JAMES T. CHANDLER, KATHY E. CHANDLER and others
Plaintiff:
DAWN E. CISEK, MARTIN CISEK, EDITH FERN ECHOLS and others
Defendant - Appellee:
MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE, LLC, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION and NEIL CHATTERJEE, in his official capacity as Acting Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
City of Rockingham v. FERC
as 15-2535
Petitioner:
CITY OF ROCKINGHAM and AMERICAN RIVERS, INCORPORATED
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION and SECRETARY OF COMMERCE
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC et al
as 3:2015cv00452
Petitioner:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Respondent:
Powhatan Energy Fund, LLC, Houlian "Alan" Chen, HEEP Fund, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
North Carolina Utilities Comm v. FERC
as 12-1881
Petitioner:
NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Tri-County Relicensing Comm v. FERC
as 12-1169
Petitioner:
TRI-COUNTY RELICENSING COMMITTEE
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
:
and
James Lyons v. FERC
as 11-1333
Petitioner:
JAMES LYONS and POLLY LYONS
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Richard Frie v. FERC
as 11-1331
Petitioner:
RICHARD W. FRIE
Respondent:
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
