GEARHART v. PUBLIC UTILITY COM'N OF OREGON

(PUC 08487, 09093; CA A140317; SC S061517 (Control), SC S061518).

339 P.3d 904 (2014)

356 Or. 216

Frank GEARHART; Patricia Morgan; Kafoury Brothers, Inc., Petitioners on Review, and Utility Reform Project, Petitioner, v. PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON and Portland General Electric Company, Respondents on Review. Frank Gearhart; Patricia Morgan; Kafoury Brothers, Inc., Petitioners, and Utility Reform Project, Petitioner on Review, v. Public Utility Commission of Oregon and Portland General Electric Company, Respondents on Review.

Supreme Court of Oregon, En Banc.

October 2, 2014.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Linda K. Williams , Portland, argued the cause and filed the briefs for petitioners on review Gearhart, Morgan, and Kafoury Brothers, Inc.

Daniel W. Meek , Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for petitioner on review Utility Reform Project.

Michael A. Casper , Deputy Solicitor General, Salem, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent on review Public Utility Commission of Oregon. With him on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum , Attorney General, and Anna M. Joyce , Solicitor General.

James N. Westwood , Stoel Rives LLP, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent on review Portland General Electric Company. With him on the brief was Rachel C. Lee.

Scott G. Seidman , Portland, filed a brief for amicus curiae Edison Electric Institute.

Katherine McDowell , McDowell Rackner & Gibson PC, Portland, filed a brief for amici curiae Avista Corporation, Idaho Power Company, Northwest Natural Gas Company, and PacifiCorp. With her on the brief was Lisa Rackner.

G. Catriona McCracken , Portland, filed a brief for amicus curiae Citizens' Utility Board of Oregon. With her on the brief were Sommer Templet and Ray Myers.


At issue in this case is an order of the Public Utility Commission (PUC) that addressed Portland General Electric's (PGE) recovery of its capital investment in the Trojan nuclear generating facility after that facility was retired from service. In that order, the PUC made three key decisions that are now before this court. First, to...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases