Cases

Worswick, C.J. ¶1 Grays Harbor Energy LLC (GHE) seeks interlocutory review of a trial court ruling that its power generation equipment was subject to the personal property tax. GHE argues that the tax did not apply because WAC 458-12-342(1) exempts personal property from taxation during a period of “new construction.” We affirm. FACTS ¶2 GHE owns a 22-acre property in Grays Harbor County.

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued January 31, 2025 Decided July 11, 2025 No. 24-1092 ENERGY HARBOR, LLC, PETITIONER v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, RESPONDENT OLD DOMINION ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE AND PJM INTERCONNECTION, L.L.C., INTERVENORS On Petit

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued January 31, 2025 Decided July 11, 2025 No. 24-1092 ENERGY HARBOR, LLC, PETITIONER v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, RESPONDENT OLD DOMINION ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE AND PJM INTERCONNECTION, L.L.C., INTERVENORS On Petit

FILED COURT OF APPEALS DIVISIM I! 2013 J 23 l' g: 13

Houghton, J. ¶1 In these consolidated cases,1 Grays Harbor Energy, LLC (GHE) appeals the Grays Harbor County (County) tax assessment of its power-generating equipment as real property. GHE argues that, by statute, the equipment is personal property. We agree and reverse and remand. FACTS ¶2 The property at issue here is a non-operating power plant owned by GHE cov

Roach, Christine M., J. Plaintiffs Paul J. McNally, Trustee of New England Laborers’ Training Fund et al. (collectively, the Funds) bring suit to establish and enforce a mechanic’s lien pursuant to G.L.c. 254, §§1, 4, 5 and 11, against Defendant Dominion Energy Salem Harbor (Dominion). The Funds have moved for summaiy judgment. Following hearing February 11, 2010, and for the following reasons, the Funds’ motion for summaiy judgm

*97 DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judge: In this appeal, two groups of Petitioners challenge four orders issued in 2013 and 2014 by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). The challenged orders approved a proposal by the New York Independent System Operator (“NY-ISO”) to create a new wholesale e

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE CLEVELAND-CLIFFS BURNS ) HARBOR LLC, a Delaware limited ) liability company, and ) CLEVELAND-CLIFFS STEEL LLC, ) a Delaware limited liability company, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2022-0378-LWW

OPINION AND ORDER MAGISTRATE JUDGE PAUL R. CHERRY This matter is before the Court on Amex Nooter, LLC’s Motion for Sanctions [DE 126], filed by Defendant Amex Nooter, LLC (“Amex Nooter”) on March 22, 2017, and ArcelorMittal’s Motion to Strike Amex Nooter’s Reply in Support of its Motion for Sanctions or, in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to File a Sur-Reply [DE 133], filed by Plaintiffs ArcelorMittal I

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 606 U. S. Part 1 Pages 100–145 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 20, 2025 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2024 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED Spring 2024 Term July 12, 2024 _____________________ released at 3:00 p.m. ASHLEY N. DEEM, CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK INTERMEDIA

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ Nos. 22-1280, 22-1376 _____________ EPSILON ENERGY USA, INC., Appellant in 22-1280 v. CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA, LLC _____________ EPSILON ENERGY USA, INC. v. CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA, LLC, Appellant in 22-1376 _

*813 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SIDNEY A. FITZWATER, Chief Judge. In this suit alleging federal-law and state-law claims based on the enactment of a municipal ordinance regulating the development of commercial real property, and on related conduct, the court must decide whether the plaintiff has standing to bring its federal-law claims. C

FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT APRIL 4, 2024 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE SUPREME COURT

*1211 Opinion FYBEL, J.— INTRODUCTION A special motion to strike under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, 1 is t

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MULTIPLE ENERGY No. 24-4691 TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, D.C. No. 2:21-cv-01149- Plaintiff - Appellee, ODW-RAO v. SETH CASDEN, OPINION Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District

DANIEL L. DYSART, Judge. | j Defendant Palm Energy Offshore, L.L.C., appeals the judgment of the trial court, rendered following a full bench trial on the merits in fayor of the plaintiffs, Red Willow Offshore, L.L.C., and Medco Ener-gi US, L.L.C., in the amount of $1,163,576.90, for damages incurred in connection with a gas processing contract. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

MEMORANDUM McHUGH, Judge. The deregulation of retail electricity markets in Pennsylvania and several other states has produced a large number of putative class actions alleging various unfair business practices, with mixed results.1 This is one such case. Plaintiff Steven Landau claims that Defendant Viridian Energy PA LLC (“Viridian”) lured him from his local utility company by mak

10 A.3d 722 (2011) 2011 ME 6 TENANTS HARBOR GENERAL STORE, LLC v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. Docket: Ken-10-1. Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Argued: September 15, 2010. Decided: January 6, 2011. *723 Clifford H. Goodall, Esq. (orally), Dyer Goodall and Denison, P.A., August