Dreyer v. Portland General Electric Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that court had \legal duty to abate the proceedings\ pending agency's resolution of issues within its primary jurisdiction
• concluding that one approach for addressing damages might “invade the PUC’s exclusive ratemaking authority,” but that alternative approach might not do so
• concluding that court had “legal duty to abate the proceedings” pending agency’s resolution of issues within its primary jurisdiction
• concluding that one approach for addressing damages might “invade the PUC’s exclusive ratemaking authority,” but that alter- native approach might not do so
• explaining that ORS 757.225 “is not aimed, as PGE suggests, at conclusively and permanently binding the entire world to the rate decisions of the PUC”
• noting that PUC proceeding could determine “whether [ratepayers] have been injured (and, if they have been, the extent of the injury)”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).