Case Name: TENNESSEE GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent; MANUFACTURERS LIGHT AND HEAT COMPANY, The Ohio Fuel Gas Company, United Fuel Gas Company, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1960-10-28
Citations: 283 F.2d 729
Docket Number: Nos. 18547, 18597
Parties: TENNESSEE GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent. MANUFACTURERS LIGHT AND HEAT COMPANY, The Ohio Fuel Gas Company, United Fuel Gas Company, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 283
Pages: 729–730

Head Matter:
TENNESSEE GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent. MANUFACTURERS LIGHT AND HEAT COMPANY, The Ohio Fuel Gas Company, United Fuel Gas Company, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Respondent.
Nos. 18547, 18597.
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 28, 1960.
Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied in No. 18547, Nov. 9, 1960.
Wm. R. Brown, Houston^ Tex., Dale A. Wright, Harry S. Littman, Harold Talisman, Jack Werner, Washington, D. C., Brooks E. Smith, New York City, for petitioner in No. 18547.
William C. Spence, Houston, Tex., Brooks E. Smith, New York City, for petitioner in No. 18597.
Herzel H. E. Plaine, Washington, D. C., David Stahl, City Solicitor, Pittsburgh, Pa., for intervenor City of Pittsburgh.
Howard E. Wahrenbrock, Sol., John C. Mason, Gen. Counsel, Peter H. Schiff, Atty., Federal Power Commission, Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before RIVES, Chief Judge, and TUTTLE and WISDOM, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
All of the Judges are of the opinion that the petitioners have not made a strong showing of any likelihood that this Court will invalidate the Commission's determination that 7% is higher than a fair rate of return for Tennessee Gas Transmission Company. Judges Rives and Tuttle are of the further opinion that the petitioners have not made a sufficient showing of any likelihood that any party will suffer irreparable loss because Tennessee Gas Company's method of allocating costs among different zones may ultimately be successfully challenged.
The Motions for Stay Pending Review of the Rate Orders of the Federal Power Commission, are, therefore, Denied.