Federal Power Commission v. Arkansas Power & Light Co.

330 U.S. 802, 67 S. Ct. 963, 91 L. Ed. 1261, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2554
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedMarch 10, 1947
DocketNo. 543
StatusPublished
Cited by26 cases

This text of 330 U.S. 802 (Federal Power Commission v. Arkansas Power & Light Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Federal Power Commission v. Arkansas Power & Light Co., 330 U.S. 802, 67 S. Ct. 963, 91 L. Ed. 1261, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2554 (1947).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Judgment reversed on the ground that respondent has failed to exhaust its administrative remedies. Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 303 [803]*803U. S. 41; Macauley v. Waterman S. S. Corp., 327 U. S. 540.

Howard E. Wahrenbrock argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the brief were Acting Solicitor General Washington, Robert L. Stern, Lambert McAllister and Louis W. McKernan. A. J. G. Priest argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were P. A. Lasley, Sidman I. Barber and B. H. Dewey, Jr. By special leave of Court, Wyatt Cleveland Holland, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for the State of Arkansas. With him on the brief were Guy E. Williams, Attorney General, H. Cecil Kilpatrick, and the Attorneys General of the States of Alabama, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming, as amici curiae.

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

Related

MUNICIPAL ELEC. UTIL. ASS'N OF NEW YORK v. Conable
577 F. Supp. 158 (District of Columbia, 1983)
Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. United Gas Pipe Line Co.
332 F. Supp. 692 (W.D. Louisiana, 1971)
Safir v. Gibson
432 F.2d 137 (Second Circuit, 1970)
Allegheny Airlines, Inc. v. Fowler
261 F. Supp. 508 (S.D. New York, 1966)
The Federal Trade Commission v. J. Weingarten, Inc.
336 F.2d 687 (Fifth Circuit, 1964)
Swift & Company v. Wickham
230 F. Supp. 398 (S.D. New York, 1964)
Long Island Rail Road Company v. United States
193 F. Supp. 795 (E.D. New York, 1961)
Holland Furnace Co. v. Purcell
125 F. Supp. 74 (W.D. Michigan, 1954)
Williams v. Petty
136 F. Supp. 283 (E.D. Oklahoma, 1953)
Akers Motor Lines, Inc. v. Malone Freight Lines, Inc.
88 F. Supp. 654 (N.D. Alabama, 1950)
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Otis & Co.
338 U.S. 843 (Supreme Court, 1949)
Scholnick v. Clark
81 F. Supp. 298 (District of Columbia, 1948)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
330 U.S. 802, 67 S. Ct. 963, 91 L. Ed. 1261, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-power-commission-v-arkansas-power-light-co-scotus-1947.