Cases

BOWMAN, Circuit Judge. This is a suit by AmerenUE, an electric utility, against the Missouri Department of Conservation (“MDOC”) and, in their official capacities, the director of MDOC and four commissioners of the Missouri Conservation Commission. We affirm the District Court’s 1 dismissal of the action as barred by the

ORDER PER CURIAM: Appellant Charles Harter entered into a cold weather payment agreement with his electric utility provider, Respondent Union Electric Company d/b/a Ameren Missouri. Harter subsequently defaulted on the payment agreement. Ameren notified Harter that it intended to disconnect his service. Harter requested that the cold weather payment agreement be reinstated, but Ameren refused. Harter filed a

ORDER PER CURIAM. Appellants, Bemark Corporation and Robert Blumer (“Bemark”) appeal from the judgments of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, in which the trial court found in favor of respondents, Union Electric d/b/a AmerenUE (“Ameren”), Norris Acker, Philip Muehlheausler, Robert Peterson, GAL Construction, Kloster Construction, and Capital Electric Line Builders. Ameren originally commenced this actio

LARSON, Senior District Judge. Plaintiff, the City of Malden, Missouri, appeals from the district court's 1 entry of judgment in favor of defendants Union Electric Company and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Missouri Utilities Company, in this antitrust action challenging defendants’ refusal to transmit power to plaintiff under a favorable tariff the city had negotiated with Missouri Utilities. Plai

ORDER PER CURIAM: KCP & L Greater Missouri Operations Company and Missouri Energy Consumers’ Group appeal the decisions of the Public Service Commission. For reasons stated in the memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

366 F.3d 655 UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY, doing business as Ameren UE, Plaintiff — Appellant,v.MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION; John D. Hoskins, in his official capacity as Director of the Missouri Department of Conservation; Stephen C. Bradford, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Conservation Commission; Anita B. Gorman, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Conservation Commission; Cynthia Metcalfe, in her offi

132 F.3d 422 28 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,503 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,Flanders Electric Motor Service, Inc., Intervenor Plaintiff-Appellant,Liberty Motor and Machinery Company, Intervenor Plaintiff,Bradford Electric Company; Roy G. Letourneau Company; JohnBenson Electric Company; Cotter Electric Company; ChicagoElectric Company; Delta-Y Electric Company; WhitfieldElectric; Pow

FLOYD R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge. The United States initiated this action pursuant to sections 106 and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9606, 9607 (1994), against 179 potentially responsible parties (“PRPs”), seeking injunctive relief and the recovery of cleanup costs for the Missouri Electrical Works Site (“MEW Site”) in Cape Girardeau, Missouri.

Cynthia L. Martin, Judge Challengers to an initiative petition, who claim the Secretary of State’s certification of the petition for inclusion on the ballot should be reversed pursuant to section 116.200.1 because the initiative violates the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause, and the Privileges and Immunities Clause, appeal from a trial court judgment denying their pre-election claims because they are not ripe for

ARNOLD, Circuit Judge. The plaintiff, City of Kirkwood, Missouri (Kirkwood), appeals from the District Court’s order granting summary judgment in this antitrust action to the defendant, Union Electric Company (UE). Kirkwood, which buys electricity from UE, alleges that UE violated the antitrust laws 1 primarily throug

887 F.2d 157 1989-2 Trade Cases 68,793 CITY OF MALDEN, MISSOURI, Appellant,v.UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY and Missouri Utilities Company, Appellees.CITY OF MALDEN, MISSOURI, Appellant,v.UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY and Missouri Utilities Company, Appellees. Nos. 88-2129, 88-2399. United States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit. Submit

HENLEY, Judge. This is an action brought by Union Electric Company (UE) against the City of Crestwood, et al. (City) seeking: (1) a judgment declaring that the City is without authority to regulate or control by its zoning ordinances the location of that part of an intercity electric transmission line proposed to be constructed and maintained within the city; and, (2) a decree enjoining the City from interfering with the use b

The question for decision is whether a license tax imposed by the City of St. Charles on persons engaged in the business of supplying electricity for any purpose is within the purview of the statute which authorizes the city to tax light companies and power companies. We hold the tax is authorized by the statute. St. Charles is a city of the third class. Section 6986, R.S. 1939 empowers cities of that class to levy and collect a license tax on ". . . light, power and water companies, .

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION FOUR RUTH CAMPBELL, ET AL., ) No. ED99622 ) Plaintiffs/Appellants, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court of ) Franklin County vs. ) )

RICHARD B. TEITELMAN, Chief Justice. This issue in this case is whether St. Charles County (“county”) or Laclede Gas Company (“Laclede”) has to pay for the relocation of Laclede’s gas lines due to the county’s plans to widen a public road. The circuit court entered a summary judgment holding that Laclede had to pay for the relocation. The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded.

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION FOUR COLLECTOR OF WINCHESTER, ) No. ED109513 MISSOURI, AND CITY OF ) WINCHESTER, MISSOURI, ) ) Respondents, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court of ) S

502 F.3d 616 (2007) ST. JOHN'S UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST, Helen Runge, and Shirley Steele, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The CITY OF CHICAGO, the Federal Aviation Administration, and Marion C. Blakely, Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, Defendants-Appellees. Village of Bensenville, Village of Elk Grove, Roxanne Mitchell, Rest Haven Cemetery Association, Robert Placek, and Leroy H. Heinrich, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The C

In this action the City of St. Charles seeks to recover from the St. Charles Gas Company, for the second half of 1942, the five per cent license tax ($1,706.07) provided by Ordinance 1787. The trial court found that the city was not entitled to recover. This court has jurisdiction of the appeal because the constitutionality of the ordinance is presented. However, it is our view that the merit of the appeal lies in the preliminary question of the city's authority to enact such an ordinance app

FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge. This matter is before the court on petitions to review an order of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), granting in part a requested increase in wholesale electric rates. A group of wholesale customers of Union Electric (UE), called the W-3 Defense Group (WDG), was granted intervention. An administrative law judge (AU) issued an initial decision which granted UE a portion of t

219 S.W.3d 226 (2007) CITY OF BRIDGETON, Appellant, v. MISSOURI-AMERICAN WATER CO., Respondent. No. SC 87744. Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc. April 17, 2007. *227 E. Robert Schultz, III, Chesterville, Carl B. Hillermann, III, Lashly & Baer, St. Louis, MO, Barry Sullivan, Gabrielle Sigel, Jenner & Block, Chicago, IL, f