Barner v. Williamson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a court “may not entertain a petition for review that collaterally attacks a prior [Commission] order”
• holding a challenge was an impermissible collateral attack on an order that “simply clarified and implemented its previous order,” but did not “substantively alter the [order’s] meaning or scope”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).