Lester v. FD Capital, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a challenge was not a collateral attack in part because FERC had given inconsistent guidance on its policy
• “[W]e reject the argument that FERC has an expansive statutory authority to retroactively reset rates.”
• “[W]e reject the argument that FERC has an expansive stat utory authority to retroactively reset rates.”
• “[W]e reject the argument that FERC has an expansive statutory authority to retroactively reset rates.”
• “The relevant question is ‘whether a reasonable party in the petitioner’s position would have perceived a very substantial risk that the order meant what the Commission now says it meant.’” (citation omitted)
• “The relevant question is ‘whether a reasonable party in the petitioner’s position would have perceived a very substantial risk that the order meant what the Commission now says it meant.’ ” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).