Anker Energy Corporation v. Consolidation Coal Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[I]n cases where approaches differ, no particular standard is binding on an inferior court because no one has received the support of a majority of the Supreme Court.”
• “[I]n cases where approaches differ, no particular standard is binding on an inferior court because none has received the support of a majority of the Supreme Court.”
• “[T]he only binding aspect of a splintered decision is its specific result.”
• “Eastern Enterprises requires a finding that the Coal Act is unconstitutional as applied to Anker, then, only if Anker ‘stand[s] in a substantially identical position to Eastern Enterprises with respect to both the plurality and Justice Kennedy’s concurrence.” ’
• “our opinion in Unity Real Estate directs us to apply an additional level of due process analysis designed to measure ‘the extent of the gap between the coal companies’ contractual promises to the Funds and the requirements of the Coal Act.” ’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).