May 19, 2019

Archives for October 7, 2015

Tenth Circuit: Unpublished Opinions, 10/7/2015

On Wednesday, October 7, 2015, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued no published opinion and six unpublished opinions.

Ray v. Garth

Whisenant v. Sheridan Production Co., LLC

Velasquez-Ramirez v. Lynch

United States v. Martinez-Gutierrez

Conley v. Pryor

Williams v. City of Tulsa

Case summaries are not provided for unpublished opinions. However, published opinions are summarized and provided by Legal Connection.

Daniel P. Rubinstein Appointed District Attorney for 21st Judicial District

On Tuesday, October 6, 2015, the governor appointed Daniel P. Rubinstein as District Attorney for the 21st Judicial District, effective October 16, 2015. Rubenstein will fill a vacancy created by the resignation of Pete Hautzinger.

Currently, Rubenstein is Chief Deputy District Attorney in the 21st Judicial District, where he manages a caseload of murder cases, racketeering, and organized crime, and supervises felony prosecution for the Mesa County District Attorney’s Office. He has been a prosecutor in Grand Junction since 1996, minus two years in private practice from 2003 to 2004. From 2005 to 2011, he was cross-designated as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney where he targeted cartels and organized crime. He received his undergraduate degree from University of the Pacific and his law degree from Drake University Law School.

Tenth Circuit: Renewable Energy Mandate Does Not Require Discriminatory Price Fixing Against Out-of-State Providers

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Energy & Environment Legal Institute v. Epel on Monday, July 13, 2015.

Colorado voters passed a ballot initiative requiring electricity generators to ensure that 20% of the electricity they sell to Colorado comes from renewable sources. Colorado receives its electricity from an interconnected grid serving 11 states and portions of Canada and Mexico. Electricity can go anywhere on the grid and come from anywhere on the grid. Colorado consumes more energy than it delivers, meaning that some out-of-state coal producers will lose business with out-of-state utilities who feed their power onto the grid. The Energy & Environment Legal Institute (EELI), on behalf of its client energy producer, brought suit in district court, arguing that Colorado’s renewable energy mandate violates dormant commerce clause jurisprudence. The district court ruled against EELI and it appealed.

The Tenth Circuit analyzed dormant or negative commerce clause jurisprudence, likening it to antitrust laws. EELI limited its appeal to the Baldwin test (see Baldwin v. G.A.F. Seelig, Inc., 294 U.S. 511 (1935)), which applies to certain price control laws controlling “extraterritorial” conduct and requires per se invalidation of the laws. EELI argued Colorado’s renewable energy mandate was such a law because it might result in fossil fuel providers being eliminated from the marketplace. The Tenth Circuit disagreed. The Tenth Circuit found no support for the proposition that Colorado’s renewable energy mandate would negatively affect prices for out-of-state consumers of fossil fuels, finding instead that the mandate was almost certain to raise energy prices in Colorado and may result in lower fossil fuel prices for out-of-state consumers. Since the Tenth Circuit read the dormant commerce clause jurisprudence as preventing discrimination against out-of-state rivals or consumers, there was no support for EELI’s argument against Colorado’s renewable energy mandate, noting that Colorado’s mandate did not directly impact pricing in Colorado or elsewhere.

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court.

Tenth Circuit: Unpublished Opinions, 10/6/2015

On Tuesday, October 6, 2015, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued one published opinion and one unpublished opinion.

Perez-Carrera v. Stancil

Case summaries are not provided for unpublished opinions. However, published opinions are summarized and provided by Legal Connection.