FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION

v.

PAN AMERICAN PETROLEUM CORP.

Citator

Cited By

• Sunray DX OIL Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 351 F.2d 395 (10th Cir. 1965)
  …itioners in the District of Columbia, Fifth, and Sixth Circuits could not proceed because of jthe absence of the record. . See, for example, Pan American Petroleum Corp. v. Federal Power Commission, 10 Cir., 339 F. 2d 694, reversed on other grounds 381 U.S. 762, 85 S.Ct. 1802, 14 L.Ed.2d 714. . The letter read in part: “This will serve to advise that the one gas well from which Sunray has been delivering gas to its purchaser, Tennessee Gas Transmission Company (Tennessee), pursuant to the temporary author…
• The La. Land & Exploration Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 574 F.2d 204 (5th Cir. 1978)
  …identiary support is incorrect. AFFIRMED. . FERC is the successor agency to the Federal Power Commission (FPC). . The transfer from Amoco to Tennessee was a sale of natural gas within the jurisdiction of FERC. FPC v. Pan American Petroleum Corp., 381 U.S. 762, 85 S.Ct. 1802, 14 L.Ed.2d 714 (1965). . In the subsequent hearings FERC considered not only whether the royalty transactions were jurisdictional sales but also whether the public interest warranted certification of the transfer from Amoco to Tenne…
• Cont'l OIL Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 370 F.2d 57 (5th Cir. 1966)
  …developed and the sale was in intrastate commerce. In a summary opinion based on Rayne the Court has also affirmed Commission jurisdiction over transfer of the Bastían Bay Field leases. Federal Power Commission v. Pan American Petroleum Corp., 1965, 381 U.S. 762, 85 S.Ct. 1802, 14 L.Ed.2d 714, rev’g 10 Cir. 1964, 339 F. 2d 694, rev’g 30 F.P.C. 1477 (1963). II. The petitioners contend that the Ship Shoal transaction is sufficiently different in economic effect from Rayne to preclude its characterization as…