Boston Edison Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

925 F.2d 487
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedJanuary 14, 1991
Docket90-1212
StatusUnpublished

This text of 925 F.2d 487 (Boston Edison Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Boston Edison Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 925 F.2d 487 (D.C. Cir. 1991).

Opinion

925 F.2d 487

288 U.S.App.D.C. 256

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant.
BOSTON EDISON COMPANY, Petitioner,
v.
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent.

Nos. 89-1480, 90-1212.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Jan. 14, 1991.

Before HARRY T. EDWARDS, BUCKLEY and RANDOLPH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the motion to dismiss appeals, the answer thereto, and the reply, it is

ORDERED that the motion be granted in part. The petitioners for review are hereby voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. See Fed.R.App.P. 42(b). Voluntary dismissal orders have no preclusive effect. See Dillard v. Sec. Pac. Brokers, Inc., 835 F.2d 607, 608 (5th Cir.1988); United States v. One Clipper Bow Ketch Nisku, 548 F.2d 8, 10 n. 2 (1st Cir.1977) (same).

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir.Rule 15.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
925 F.2d 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boston-edison-company-v-federal-energy-regulatory--cadc-1991.