Loading…

Gannon v. Mobil Oil Co. — freecase.ai

Search Pricing About Why now Resources Guides

Opinion

Gannon v. Mobil Oil Co.

58 L. Ed. 2d 177 · Supreme Court of the United States · Oct 2, 1978

Full text

Gannon v. Mobil Oil Co., a Division of Socony Oil Co., Inc.

C. A. 10th. Cir. Certio-rari denied.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author
Judges: Not listed
Cluster ID: 9019481

Citations

58 L. Ed. 2d 177
439 U.S. 867
99 S. Ct. 192
1978 U.S. LEXIS 3122

Cited by

People v. Banks
Illinois Supreme Court · May 24, 2010
United States v. Melo
D. Massachusetts · Jan 19, 2006
State v. Maynard
Missouri Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 1997
Arevalo v. State
Wyoming Supreme Court · May 19, 1997
Wells Fargo Bank v. Goldzband
California Court of Appeal · Mar 14, 1997
United States v. Manuel Bobadilla-Lopez
Ninth Circuit · Jan 9, 1992
Mitchell v. Miner
Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 6, 1990
Ted Sobiech, D/B/A Ted Sobiech Farms, Plaintiff-Counter-Claim v. International Staple and MacHine Co., Inc., Defendant-Counter-Claim
Second Circuit · Feb 10, 1989
White v. Conoco, Inc.

© 2026 freecase.aicontact@freecase.aiBuilt by lawyers. Powered by AI.

Freecase.ai provides legal information for educational and research purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Always consult a licensed attorney for legal guidance. Terms of Service

Tenth Circuit · Jun 22, 1988

State ex rel. Arkansas Power & Light Co. v. Missouri Public Service Commission

Missouri Court of Appeals · Jul 21, 1987

State ex rel. Empire District Electric Co. v. Public Service Commission

Missouri Court of Appeals · May 28, 1986

Bennett v. Mallinckrodt, Inc.

Missouri Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 1985

Parentheticals

state power to grant or deny certificate of public convenience and necessity is not preempted
Pacific Legal Foundation, a California Nonprofit Corporation v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission, a State Agency, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Defendants-Intervenors- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. And Southern California Edison Co., Plaintiffs v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission, a State Agency, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Defendants-Intervenors
"The federal government regulates how nuclear power plants will be constructed and maintained; the State of Missouri regulates whether they will be constructed."
Pacific Legal Foundation, a California Nonprofit Corporation v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission, a State Agency, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Defendants-Intervenors- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. And Southern California Edison Co., Plaintiffs v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission, a State Agency, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Defendants-Intervenors
state power to grant or deny certificate of public convenience and necessity is not preempted
Pacific Legal Foundation v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission
“The federal government regulates how nuclear power plants will be constructed and maintained; the State of Missouri regulates whether they will be constructed.”
Pacific Legal Foundation v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission