Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC
Headline: CADC Affirms FERC Denial of Duke Energy's Rehearing Request
Citation: 106 F.4th 1145
Case Summary
Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC, decided by D.C. Circuit on July 9, 2024, resulted in a affirmed outcome. The court affirmed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) decision to deny Duke Energy Progress, LLC's request for rehearing, holding that FERC had properly applied its authority under the Federal Power Act and did not abuse its discretion. The court held: The court held that FERC's denial of Duke Energy's rehearing request was within its statutory authority under the Federal Power Act and did not constitute an abuse of discretion.. The court held that FERC's interpretation of its own regulations was reasonable and supported by the record.. The court held that Duke Energy failed to demonstrate that FERC's decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.. The court held that FERC's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not based on an erroneous legal standard.. The court held that FERC's decision was not contrary to law and did not exceed its statutory authority.. This case reinforces the deference given to FERC's interpretation of its own regulations and the substantial evidence standard in reviewing FERC's decisions. It is significant for utility companies and regulatory agencies alike, as it sets a precedent for the scope of judicial review of FERC's actions.
AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.
Key Holdings
The court established the following key holdings in this case:
- The court held that FERC's denial of Duke Energy's rehearing request was within its statutory authority under the Federal Power Act and did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
- The court held that FERC's interpretation of its own regulations was reasonable and supported by the record.
- The court held that Duke Energy failed to demonstrate that FERC's decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.
- The court held that FERC's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not based on an erroneous legal standard.
- The court held that FERC's decision was not contrary to law and did not exceed its statutory authority.
Entities and Participants
Frequently Asked Questions (15)
Comprehensive Q&A covering every aspect of this court opinion.
Basic Questions (15)
Q: What is Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC about?
Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC is a case decided by D.C. Circuit on July 9, 2024.
Q: What court decided Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC?
Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC was decided by the D.C. Circuit, which is part of the federal judiciary. This is a federal appellate court.
Q: When was Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC decided?
Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC was decided on July 9, 2024.
Q: What was the docket number in Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC?
The docket number for Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC is 21-1272. This identifier is used to track the case through the court system.
Q: What is the citation for Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC?
The citation for Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC is 106 F.4th 1145. Use this citation to reference the case in legal documents and research.
Q: Is Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC published?
Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC is a published, precedential opinion. Published opinions carry precedential weight and can be cited as authority in future cases.
Q: What was the ruling in Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC?
The lower court's decision was affirmed in Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC. Key holdings: The court held that FERC's denial of Duke Energy's rehearing request was within its statutory authority under the Federal Power Act and did not constitute an abuse of discretion.; The court held that FERC's interpretation of its own regulations was reasonable and supported by the record.; The court held that Duke Energy failed to demonstrate that FERC's decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.; The court held that FERC's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not based on an erroneous legal standard.; The court held that FERC's decision was not contrary to law and did not exceed its statutory authority..
Q: Why is Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC important?
Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC has an impact score of 75/100, indicating significant legal impact. This case reinforces the deference given to FERC's interpretation of its own regulations and the substantial evidence standard in reviewing FERC's decisions. It is significant for utility companies and regulatory agencies alike, as it sets a precedent for the scope of judicial review of FERC's actions.
Q: What precedent does Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC set?
Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC established the following key holdings: (1) The court held that FERC's denial of Duke Energy's rehearing request was within its statutory authority under the Federal Power Act and did not constitute an abuse of discretion. (2) The court held that FERC's interpretation of its own regulations was reasonable and supported by the record. (3) The court held that Duke Energy failed to demonstrate that FERC's decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law. (4) The court held that FERC's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not based on an erroneous legal standard. (5) The court held that FERC's decision was not contrary to law and did not exceed its statutory authority.
Q: What are the key holdings in Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC?
1. The court held that FERC's denial of Duke Energy's rehearing request was within its statutory authority under the Federal Power Act and did not constitute an abuse of discretion. 2. The court held that FERC's interpretation of its own regulations was reasonable and supported by the record. 3. The court held that Duke Energy failed to demonstrate that FERC's decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law. 4. The court held that FERC's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not based on an erroneous legal standard. 5. The court held that FERC's decision was not contrary to law and did not exceed its statutory authority.
Q: How does Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC affect me?
This case reinforces the deference given to FERC's interpretation of its own regulations and the substantial evidence standard in reviewing FERC's decisions. It is significant for utility companies and regulatory agencies alike, as it sets a precedent for the scope of judicial review of FERC's actions. As a decision from a federal appellate court, its reach is national. This case is moderate in legal complexity to understand.
Q: Can Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC be appealed?
Potentially — decisions from federal appellate courts can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States via a petition for certiorari, though the Court accepts very few cases.
Q: What cases are related to Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC?
Precedent cases cited or related to Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984); Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital, 488 U.S. 204 (1988).
Q: What standard of review did the court apply to FERC's decision?
The court applied the standard of review under the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires the court to determine whether FERC's decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.
Q: Did the court find that FERC's decision was supported by substantial evidence?
Yes, the court held that FERC's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not based on an erroneous legal standard.
Cited Precedents
This opinion references the following precedent cases:
- Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984)
- Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital, 488 U.S. 204 (1988)
Case Details
| Case Name | Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC |
| Citation | 106 F.4th 1145 |
| Court | D.C. Circuit |
| Date Filed | 2024-07-09 |
| Docket Number | 21-1272 |
| Precedential Status | Published |
| Outcome | Affirmed |
| Disposition | affirmed |
| Impact Score | 75 / 100 |
| Significance | This case reinforces the deference given to FERC's interpretation of its own regulations and the substantial evidence standard in reviewing FERC's decisions. It is significant for utility companies and regulatory agencies alike, as it sets a precedent for the scope of judicial review of FERC's actions. |
| Complexity | moderate |
| Legal Topics | Federal Power Act, Administrative Procedure Act, Substantial evidence, Abuse of discretion, Reasonable interpretation of regulations |
| Jurisdiction | federal |
Related Legal Resources
About This Analysis
This AI-generated analysis of Duke Energy Progress, LLC v. FERC was produced by CaseLawBrief to help legal professionals, researchers, students, and the general public understand this court opinion in plain English.
CaseLawBrief aggregates court opinions from CourtListener, a project of the Free Law Project, and enriches them with AI-powered analysis. Our goal is to make the law more accessible and understandable to everyone, regardless of their legal background.
AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.
Related Cases
Other opinions on Federal Power Act or from the D.C. Circuit:
-
J. Sidak v. United States International Trade Commission
D.C. Circuit Affirms ITC's No-Infringement Finding in Trade CaseD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-24
-
Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Markwayne Mullin
Asylum seekers lack standing to challenge park shelter settlementD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-24
-
United States v. All Petroleum-Product Cargo Onboard the M/T Arina
D.C. Circuit Upholds Warrantless Search of M/T Arina CargoD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-21
-
National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States v. National Park Service
NPS Concessions in Historic Park Upheld by D.C. CircuitD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-17
-
Inova Health Care Services v. Omni Shoreham Corporation
Court finds Omni Shoreham liable for unpaid healthcare servicesD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-17
-
Jane Doe v. Todd Blanche
Attorney's statements during litigation are privileged, barring defamation claimD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-17
-
John Doe v. SEC
D.C. Circuit: SEC ALJs violate Appointments ClauseD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-17
-
Secretary of Labor v. KC Transport, Inc.
D.C. Circuit Upholds NLRB Finding of Unlawful Retaliation Against EmployeesD.C. Circuit · 2026-04-17