Ongoing Matters

State of Alaska
Represented the State of Alaska on all matters related to the TransAlaska Pipeline System (TAPS). In 1990, the owners of TAPS discovered extensive corrosion in parts of the pipeline system. Because rate-basing the cost of repairs has a negative impact on the State's royalties and tax revenues, the State protested at FERC, arguing that repair costs should be borne by the responsible parties. In order to limit the risks of litigation, we designed an ADR process specific to the problem which was accepted by all the parties. The parties held a three-day mini-trial before a panel consisting of one representative of each interested party and an independent mediator. As a result of this process, the parties developed a remediation strategy and resolved other issues.

2005

Uzal, LLC v. Southwest Gas Corporation and Paiute Pipeline Company
Represented Southwest Gas Corporation and Paiute Pipeline Company in defending an action filed by Uzal for alleged breach of lease agreement regarding LNG plant and related gas pipelines.

2004

Public Utility District No. 1 of Grays Harbor County, Washington v. Idacorp, Inc., et al.
We represented Idacorp in an unjust enrichment, rescission or reformation action filed by Grays Harbor PUD seeking retroactive price modifications to power contracts. Our client Idacorp's motion to dismiss was granted in district court and Grays Harbor appealed. In what has become one of the leading cases on market-based rates in the Ninth Circuit, the Court affirmed the district court's dismissal, finding that Grays Harbor's complaint was preempted under the Federal Power Act's grant of exclusive jurisdiction over wholesale power rates to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and was also barred by the filed-rate doctrine. The Case is reported at 379 F.3d 641, 647 (9th Cir., 2004).

City of Tacoma v. TransAlta Energy Marketing (US) Inc., et al.
We represent Idacorp Energy, LP, Idaho Power Co., Tucson Electric Co., and TransAltaEnergy Marketing (US), Inc. in a lawsuit filed by the City of Tacoma, Washington in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Tacoma against numerous defendants, alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act.  These allegations are based on claims of energy market manipulation, false load scheduling and bid rigging and misrepresentation or withholding of energy supply.  The plaintiff seeks compensatory damages of not less than $175 million.  This case was transferred and consolidated with other similar cases currently pending before the Honorable Robert H. Whaley, sitting by designation in the Southern District of California, in Multidistrict Litigation Docket No. 1405. 

Wah Chang v. Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C., et al.
United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Case No. 04-CV-1839-RHW, and Wah Chang v. Avista Corporation, et al., United States District Court for Southern District of California, Case No. 04-CV-1840-RHW.  We represent TransAltaEnergy Marketing (U.S.), Inc., TransAlta Energy Marketing (California), Inc., Idaho Power Company, and Idacorp Energy L.P. in two lawsuits filed by Wah Chang in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon against numerous defendants, alleging violations of federal antitrust laws, violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), violations of Oregon antitrust laws, and wrongful interference with contract relating to the energy crisis in California and the Pacific Northwest.  These allegations include bid rigging, falsely creating congestion, and misrepresenting the source and destination of energy.  These cases were transferred and consolidated with other similar cases currently pending before the Honorable Robert H. Whaley, sitting by designation in the Southern District of California, in Multidisctrict Litigation Docket No. 1405. 

2003

State of Nevada, by and through its agency Colorado River Commission of Nevada v. Pioneer Companies, Inc., et al.
Obtained dismissals on Rule 12 (b)(6) motions for clients Avista Energy, Inc. and Idaho Power Company in interpleader action filed by CRCN against 14 wholesale providers of electricity arising out of alleged breaches of retail power contracts by its retail customers.

Idacorp Energy L.P. v. Truckee-Donner Public Utility District
Represented clients in declaratory judgment, breach of oral agreement, reformation, and injunctive relief action filed by Idacorp Energy against Truckee-Donner Public Utility District respecting power supply contract.

Idacorp Energy L.P. v. Overton Power District No. 5
Represented Plaintiff Idacorp Energy in declaratory judgment, damages, and injunctive relief action against Overton Power District for improper attempt to renegotiate power supply contract and for failure to pay for electricity delivered under contract.

2002

Wholesale Electricity Antitrust Cases I & II
Currently represent Avista Energy, Inc., Puget Sound Energy, Idacorp Energy, L.P., Tucson Electric Power Company, TransAlta Energy Marketing, Inc., Sierra Pacific Industries, Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement District, Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Silicon Valley Power (City of Santa Clara), and Northern California Power Agency as cross-defendants in two cross-complaint actions filed by Reliant Energy and Duke Energy in San Diego Superior Court (Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding Nos. 4204 and 4205) against 30 wholesale electricity market participants for indemnity and declaratory relief.

Edison Power Producers Litigation
Represented 12 geothermal and cogeneration power generators (QFs") in their effort to collect hundreds of millions of dollars from Southern California Edison for unpaid energy deliveries. We obtained TROs and Preliminary Injunctions against Edison (and PG&E in a related series of cases) permitting our clients to sell into the open market due to Edison's material breaches. On behalf of several clients - which include CalEnergy Company, NP Cogen, Kramer Junction (SEGs), El Paso Merchant Energy, Corona Energy Partners, and IMC Chemicals - we recently obtained conditional settlements with Edison for the payment of 100% of the amounts past due, plus interest. On behalf of IMC Chemicals, we obtained a right to attach order against Edison for some $7.5 million - only 3 other QFs in the State obtained similar relief.

Sierra Pacific Industries v. Pacific Gas and Electric Company; California Independent System Operator
Represented biomass QF in breach of contract action against PG&E, for failure to pay for energy delivered by Plaintiff, and an unfair business practices and antitrust action against PG&E and the CalISO, for their concerted efforts to deny Plaintiff the right to change Scheduling Coordinators and precluding SPI's access to the California energy market.

Idaho Power Company, dba Idacorp Energy Solutions v. Boston Properties, Inc.; Boston Properties Limited Partnership; Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Represented ESP clients in breach of contract, declaratory judgment and unfair business practices action filed by Plaintiff Idacorp Power against Boston Properties for its failure to pay for electricity delivered under power supply contract.

California Attorney General v. Various Electricity Generators
Currently represent Idacorp Energy, L.P., Puget Sound Energy, Tucson Electric Power Company, and TransAlta Energy Marketing, Inc. in separate unfair competition actions filed by the California State Attorney General in San Francisco County Superior Court which have been removed to federal court by successful petition of defendants. The State claims that rates for wholesale electricity charged by the generators are unjust and unreasonable and that the generators failed properly to file their rates with the FERC.

Avista Energy Inc. v. California Power Exchange Corporation
Represented utility in action against CalPX for breach of PX FERC tariffs and participation agreement regarding chargebacks relating to utility defaults.

2001

Inverse Condemnation Cases Coordination Proceeding No. 4203 2001 Currently represent Constellation NewEnergy, Inc., AES Placerita, Avista Energy, Inc., Idaho Power Company, Salt River Project Agricultural, Sierra Pacific Industries, and El Paso Merchant Energy, L.P. in connection with claims by PX Market Participants that the State owes the Participants the fair market value for the block forward energy contracts it commandeered when Edison and PG&E defaulted on their obligations in the various markets managed by the PX.

Mervyn's and Dayton-Hudson Corp. v. QST Energy, Inc.; QST Energy, Inc. v. Mervyn's; QST Energy, Inc. v. Target
Represented client in action against ESP for breach of contract arising out of ESP's abandonment of operations in state.