Interstate Electric v. Federal Power Commission, 11590.

• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM
• Citation: Interstate Electric v. Federal Power Commission, 164 F.2d 485 (9th Cir. 1947)
• Decision Date: 24 November 1947
• Docket Number: No. 11590.,11590.
• Parties: INTERSTATE ELECTRIC, Inc., et al. v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION.

164 F.2d 485 (1947)

INTERSTATE ELECTRIC, Inc., et al. v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION.

No. 11590.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

November 24, 1947.

D. Elwood Caples, of Vancouver, Wash., John T. McCutcheon, of Tacoma, Wash., Donald Heisler, of Dalles, Or., Edward E. Henry, of Seattle, Wash., and Cameron Sherwood and Herman H. Hahner, both of Walla Walla, Wash., for petitioners.

Bradford Ross, General Counsel, and Howard E. Wahrenbrock, Asst. Gen. Counsel, both of Washington, D.C., (Louis W. McKernan, and A. R. Spalter, both of Washington, D.C., of counsel), for respondent.

Before MATHEWS, HEALY, and ORR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This proceeding was brought by petitioners to review an order of respondent, Federal Power Commission, authorizing the merger and consolidation of facilities of Northwestern Electric Company with those of Pacific Power & Light Company, issued upon an application of those companies pursuant to § 203 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C.A. § 824b. The respondent has, moved to dismiss the petition for review on the ground that petitioners are not parties aggrieved by the order, as is required by § 313(b) of the Act, 16 U.S.C.A. § 825l(b).

The motion must be granted. While petitioners were permitted by orders of the Commission to intervene in the proceeding before that body, the order expressly stated in each instance that the admission of such intervenor "shall not be construed as recognition by the Commission that it might be aggrieved by any order or orders of the Commission entered in this proceeding." In the course of the hearing before the...