Document: 453 U.S. 571 101 S.Ct. 2925 69 L.Ed.2d 856 ARKANSAS LOUISIANA GAS COMPANY, Petitioner,v.Frank J. HALL et al. No. 78-1789. Argued April 20, 1981. Decided July 2, Syllabus In 1952, respondent natural gas producers and petitioner entered into a contract under which respondents agreed to sell from certain field in Louisiana. The contained fixed price schedule "favored nations clause," provided that if purchased the another party at higher rate than it was paying respondents, then would be entitled for their sales petitioner. 1954, filed rates with Federal Power Commission (now Energy Regulatory Commission) obtained certificate authorizing sale of specified rates. 1961, leases same United States began producing on its leasehold. 1974, an action Louisiana state court, contending petitioner's lease payments had triggered favored clause. Because not increased as required by clause, sought damages amount equal difference between they actually were paid intervening years have been clause gone effect. Although finding triggered, trial court held "filed doctrine," prohibits federally regulated seller charging those pursuant Natural Gas Act, precluded award period prior 1972 (the time during subject Commission's jurisdiction). intermediate appellate affirmed, but Supreme Court reversed, holding 1961 notwithstanding doctrine. reasoned failure inform prevented filing increases Commission, done so approved. Held: doctrine breach jurisdiction. Pp. 576-585. (a) Act bars collecting other one prevents itself imposing increase already sold. Here, Court's ruling amounts nothing less retroactive based speculation about what might faced facts this case. This is precisely forbids. It undermine congressional scheme uniform regulation allow never thus found reasonable within meaning Act. 576-579. (b) Congress has granted exclusive authority over and, doing, withheld grant or permit collection file. inconsistent purpose do through breach-of-contract may do. Under doctrine, alone empowered approve it, until so, no file charged. below usurped function assigned federal regulatory body. Cf.Chicago & North Western Transp. Co. v. Kalo Brick Tile Co., 450 311, 1124, 67 258. Supremacy Clause will permit. 579-582. (c) when there conflict rate, prevails. P. 582. (d) Permitting right collect excess "only accentuates danger conflict," appeal equitable principles can justify such usurpation authority. 583584. La., 368 So.2d 984, affirmed part, vacated remanded. Reuben Goldberg, Washington, D. C., James Fleet Howell, Baton Rouge, respondents. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 1 doctrine" 52 Stat. 821, amended, 15 U.S.C. § 717 seq. (1976 ed. Supp. III). question before us whether forbids calculate assumption filed, approved it. 2 * Respondents are gas, Arkansas (Arkla) customer who buys gas. respondents1 Arkla Sligo Field clause." Arkla.2 Commission)3 contract. 3 September state-court Arkla's 4 answer, denied purchases subsequently amended answer allege addition primary jurisdiction issues contention. also did act immediately, case proceeded trial. nonetheless 1972. 359 255 (1978), both parties leave appeal. petition appeal, 362 1120 certiorari interpretation should referred Commission. We petition. 444 878, 100 166, 62 108 (1979). 5 While pending respondents' review reversed measure damages. 984 Id., 991. After decision Louisiana, May 1979 finally declined exercise case, raised matters particular expertise. Hall, 7 FERC ¶ 61,175, p. 61,321.4 did, however, state: "It our 1961-1972 violates doctrine." 61,325, n. 18.5 legally period. See infra, subsequent challenging judgment 449 1109, 916, 66 838 (1981).6 II 6 Sections 4(c) 4(d) 822-823, §§ 717c(c) 717c(d), require sellers interstate commerce 4(a) 822, 717c(a), company files transportation lawful only "just reasonable." No substitute own reasonableness decide vested solely see FPC Hope 320 591, 611, 64 281, 292, 88 L.Ed. 333 (1944), "the fixes," Montana-Dakota Utilities Northwestern Public Service 341 246, 251, 71 692, 695, 95 912 (1951).7 Except permits waiver, 4(d), 823, 717c(d). These straightforward underlie entity charge services properly appropriate See, e. g., T. I. M. E. Inc. States, 464, 473, 79 904, 909, 952 (1959). origins cases interpreting Interstate Commerce see, Lowden Simonds-Shields-Lonsdale Grain 306 516, 520-521, 59 612, 614, 83 953 (1939); Pennsylvania R. International Coal 230 184, 196-197, 33 893, 895-896, 57 1446 (1913), extended across spectrum utilities. "The considerations underlying . preservation agency's need insure companies agency made cognizant." City Cleveland FPC, 174 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 10, 525 F.2d 845, 854 (1976). Piqua FERC, 198 8, 13, 610 950, 955 Not courts lack impose different power alter retroactively.8 When finds unreasonable, "shall determine just thereafter observed force." 5(a), 717d(a) (emphasis added). Tennessee 371 145, 152-153, 211, 215, 9 199 (1962); Sierra Pacific 350 348, 353, 76 368, 371, 388 (1956). rule substitution unreasonably high low rate." supra, 12, F.2d, 954. 8 sum, Petitioner amicus curiae argue these rules taken tandem sufficient dispose matter how characterized, argue, This, contend, agree. Following course greater relief could obtain itself. asserting application here, contend first more suffered result contract.9 interests, maintain, affected court's action. But permitting "unsettling effect purchase transactions" "potential disruption markets ." 13 61,000, 61,213 (1980).10 10 Even record mere fact brought suit law rescue congress established form regulation, "there divided commerce." Missouri Stroud, 267 404, 408, 45 243, 245, 683 (1925). here surely 11 rejected analogous claim earlier Term Chicago 258 (1981). There shipper goods rail assert common-law tort stemming carrier's cease service line. unanimously because had, approving cessation, ruled all raise suit, pre-empted. reaching conclusion, we explained "[a] system each State could, courts, railroad carriers version requirements hardly odds uniformity contemplated enacting Act." 326, S.Ct., 1134. To hold otherwise, said, merely "an attempt disappointed gain Iowa Commission." 324, 12 us, necessarily supported reasonable. Otherwise, basis So.2d, 991, rate. make judgment, And far issue, expressly speculate predecessor done.11 below, like Brick, consequently Respondents' theory give inordinate importance role contracts buyers regulating Of course, occasion, set E.g., Permian Basin Area Rate Cases, 390 747, 820-822, 1344, 1387-1388, 20 312 (1968); Pipe Line Mobile Corp., 332, 338-340, 373, 377-378, 373 stand proposition lacks affirmative authority, absent extraordinary circumstances, "abrogate existing contractual arrangements." U.S., 820, 1388. 338-339, 377-378. That does affect supremacy itself, controls. e.g., Louisville Nashville Maxwell, 237 94, 97, 35 494, 495, 853 (1915); Texas Mugg, 202 242, 26 628, 630, 50 1011 (1906). "This undeniably strict, obviously work hardship some cases, embodies policy adopted 495. Moreover, vary private agreement undercut clear scheme: granting opportunity every judge Cf. 377-378.12 14 saw considerations. Clause, told, bar recovery defendant's misconduct find argument compelling. intentionally failed effort defraud them. Consequently, misconduct, consider case.13 commit simple called upon laws conflict, violated analysis. Every pre-emption involves law. A provides shield challenged conduct almost always state-law violation unredressed. Thus San Diego Building Trades Council Garmon, 236, 773, 775 (1959), group unions peaceful picketing enforcement scheme. rather type available National Labor Relations Board weighed against pre-emption, favor "[S]ince remedies ingredient any integrated regulation," Frankfurter wrote Court, "to remedy conflict." 247, 780. principle applies here. III 16 jurisdiction.14 respects relating damages, affirmed. With respect calculation vacated, remanded further proceedings opinion. 17 So ordered. 18 STEWART took part consideration 19 POWELL, dissenting. I agree much STEVENS' dissenting affirm seek 21 By virtue "most nations" obligated pay comparable supplier. comply provision, today holds nevertheless recover said requires filing. 22 neglectful otherwise fault seeking approval responsible disclose producer conditions. Appeal caused primarily "uncooperative evasive" officials. 255, 264 (1978). knew facts, duty them order frustrate showing knowledge entitlement invoke Freedom Information preclude contrary, rewards notify 23 STEVENS, whom REHNQUIST joins, 24 From 1975, acquired two sources terms entirely consistent policies reflected III), supply price.1 fact, unbeknown contract, substantially lower source one, even Arkla, suggests legitimate justification discrimination. 25 Despite breached despite threatened allowing redress breach, denies benefit bargain. Surely, reasonable, statutory favors uniformity, secret Yet wondrous extension so-called concludes assess deprives prevent profiting handsomely wrong, believe policies, respectfully dissent. As lengthy relevant established. utility engaged business six States.2 Over years, large quantities produced Bossier Parish, La.; States. law, prohibited either suppliers area ceiling so.3 reference highest majority production quality field." App. 123. least well located Field.4 ante, 573-574, n.2. two-thirds 27 differential that, response inquiries arrangement officials uncooperative evasive." characterized nondisclosure evasiveness "not commendable," because, "party alleging fraud burden establishing preponderance evidence," prove guilty actual fraud. Ibid. clear, discriminatory supplier constituted contract.5 28 decided measured For after 1972, formally certificated "small producers," obligation new schedules exceed Commission.6 recognized collected prices without Commission,7 recoverable reasons. First, party's condition, condition considered fulfilled performance party.8 squarely effectively making necessary filings States.9 Second, noting base ceilings Commission,10 indicated filed,11 concluded "it probable contractually-authorized proper procedures followed." 991 29 Summarizing courts' rulings, propositions must having established: (1) respondents; (2) Commission; (3) exceeded applicable (4) very presumptively reasonable," indeed promptly filed. plainly adequate support my opinion, conclusion pre-empted 30 Section 717c, identifies four separate arguably implicated litigation. fully policies. 31 subsection charges received shall reasonable."12 dispute equally payment contemporaneously ceiling. Both repeatedly unambiguously determined accordance rates.13 Indeed, small "that requested zone reasonableness."14 32 perfectly violate Act's substantive prohibition producers, neither periods specifically makes periods. determining reason treat differently. simply suggest receive requirement reasonable.15 expresses strong policy—reflected most statutes—against pricing.16 reaches tolerates blatant policy, encourage violations future. 34 Entirely apart undertaking field, results treatment competing suppliers. Nothing proven wrongdoing explanation discrimination pointed pricing all—let magnitude revealed record. lesson teach plain language 4(b), undue preference conceal Third, favoring public disclosure rates.17 public. Only resort able access confirm suspicions violating undertaking. rewarding successful concealment directly payable Field, ignores serve. 36 Fourth, imposes procedural designed protect interests three preceding subsections.18 none infringed slightest exalts procedure substance deny wrongfully following normal procedures. 37 procedures, change take days' notice given going believing reasonable—or reasonable—it sense precludes regard inflexible barrier regardless merits further, nor with, 4(d).19 38 commonplace often standard event materialize. executory breached, injured evaluation benefits probably resulted occurred.20 If attorney hired negligently he defend malpractice complaint arguing damaged events. rejection highly unlikely, absurd impossible know absolute certainty accepted actions, contrast, deal probabilities. 39 raises issue ceilings, rejecting adduced, presume become effective routinely. garden-variety significant purchaser employed thugs waylay lawyer way him schedule. 40 Nor hypothetical involving violence.21 cannot except duly kind wrong conversely, probability timely measuring why well? carrier body leaping 41 comes closest supporting position protecting basic determination ceilings. venture ratemaking present. occasion assume controversy, consistently so.22 assessing exercised have. usurp test statute, seems awarded policy. 42 Although, today, term used decisions contours apparently encompasses components, ordered 43 generally 912,23 952,24 whose agency. Thus, escalated obtaining waiver requirement, mean, so. Pan American Petroleum Corp. Superior 366 656, 662-664, 81 1303, 1307-1308, 584. tort, presumably means valid objection circumvent litigation represented collusive method unlawful preference. present 44 recognize task instance "reasonable" statute judicial task, administrative agency— case—that apply zone. gave rise distinguishable today. Inc., plaintiff's body, unreasonable requirements.25 determinations compliance governing statute.26 law; Arkla. enforce outside vindication rights, overturn expert agency; rates, reasonableness, contracted receive.27 Hewitt-Robins Eastern Freight-Ways, 84, 157, 142. 46 unanimous Pipeline sheds light places reliance. Gas, United, producer, supplied long-term purported Mobile's request reject United's filing, unless declared 336-337, 376-377. position, establish lawful, is, requirements. 339-340, 378. although accordingly erred failing directed restitution overpayments. 347, 382. 47 rationale long lawful.28 unilateral change.29 specify reasonable.30 Neither announces IV 48 bolster reliance contends sure notified statements November 5, 1980.31 amici awarding 1972.32 lend surprising argument. What advance deemed 49 stated reluctant predecessors now describe speculative committed error presuming routinely indicates reluctance interpretation, namely, anyone else, question. twice presented question, so.33 correctly resolved courts. declines regarded pre-1961 lawful. Again, wholly unnecessary. confronted precise 1961. escalation clauses future, eliminate provisions previously executed contracts.34 demonstrated computing 1975. all, truncated allows. 51 expressed concern impact broader "regulatory responsibilities." 61,100, (1980). Two specific concerns identified—that passed consumers, claims breached. short pay; valid, ample stockholders customers bear additional cost. second exaggerated 606 page, 34, unlikely many purchasers successfully concealed extent counterparts contracts, me way. concerned Commissioners inappropriate. Unlike Rather speculate, acted manner perceived correct disputed questions resolved. 53 founded mechanical developed contexts serve purposes. commits manifest applying ratify identified absolutely interest served today's intrusion include original successors part: "If Buyer wells agreement, hereunder hereof concurrently contract." 99. On October 1977, responsibilities transferred CFR 1000.1(d) "Commission" refers referring date date. initially March 1976, citing then-existing assuming court. 55 F.P.C. 1018, 1020-1021. rehearing, noted 19, gained producer" status, therefore longer filings. 56 2905 automatic deferral Appeals District Columbia Circuit. asked consideration, motion. remand, Appeals. limited disagreement producers" 157.40 disputes met criteria producers." deferring finding. Subsequent certiorari, informed amounting increase, ask waive 61,000 order, "speculat[e] 61,213. added "would certainly suspended filing." markets." Review Fifth statutes "are material identical." follow practice interchangeably pertinent sections statutes. ibid.; 820-821, (1968). alteration particular, reparations, Sunray DX Oil 391 9, 24, 1526, 1534, (1968), "for good cause shown," usual Assuming, arguendo, file, note exists waiving behalf. 6, supra. seeks determine, decline disagree construction State. Apparently challenge determination, corporate assets consumers. true, assertion pass along customers. denying conceded though since assert, found, repeated rehearing F.R.C. approves increase; lists, parties, maximum which, contractually authorized followed, 2906. mean submitted, fact. requirements, forth several reasons disapproving falling done. rely 18, 1979, declining letter staff counsel. Staff counsel's ambiguous best, unnecessary add counsel speak relied appears disapproves small-producer status. F.E.R.C. (1979) ("It doctrine"); id., ("As above, effect, waived [respondents'] back conflicts doctrine"). unconnected references "approval" override express disapproval. None commands contrary result. Skelly Phillips 339 667, 70 876, 94 1194 (1950), declaratory actions potentially defense suit. terminated, barred remedy. Memphis Light Water Division, 358 103, 194, 153 (1958), mentioned text, automatically abrogate contracts. 584 (1961), forum buyer bring refund contravened doctrine; furthered doctrine's purpose. panel Circuit 10-11, 854-855 (1976), variant legal wages war premises immediately involved quoted dictum lead instant disapproved. "could reasonably assumed government royalty trigger [favored clause]." contains findings estoppel relevance. save day face fraudulent conduct. created clause" Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri. example, 1968 18.6 cents per thousand cubic feet (Mcf). 2095, 2096 fraction Mcf. 11. 1952 Mcf 1968. 98. contended "purchase" 16; 261-262 (La.App.1978); 989, (La.1979). Kerr-McGee 447 569 (CA7 1971). reopen 579, 9. being revealing existence price, doubt comment applicability advantage his wrongful act." 990. significance certification producers: "A 'small producer' (as defined regulations) certificate' exempting C.F.R. 157.40. Several plaintiffs certificates' certificates issued Throughout thereafter. 574, 3. explained, follows: "Article 2040, interpreted, fulfilled, debtor, bound fulfillment. George W. Garig Transfer Harris [226 La. 117, 75 (1954)]; Southport Mill Friedrichs [171 786, 132 So. 346 (1931)]; Morrison Mioton [163 1065, 113 456 (1927)]. long-established thing avail himself non-performance occasioned act. Cox Department Highways, 252 22, 209 (1968)." "To realize higher, plaintiffs, However, requisite not, time, defendant was, seller. apparent fulfillment (plaintiffs arrangements government. Pursuant article 2040 jurisprudence article, (that schedules) fulfilled." understanding position: "We respective 7. At trial, 1976 followed (Exhibit D-59). clearly evidence adduced unlikely." original). provides: "All made, demanded, natural-gas connection regulations affecting pertaining charges, unlawful." 717c(a). 18-19; 7; F.P.C., stated: "Finally, responsibilities. great import responsibility reasonableness. "On Hall group. previous orders followed. "In authorize district remand feel case." pp. 61,323-61,324 (footnotes omitted). argued improperly included attributable liquefiable hydrocarbons wells. computation adjustment post-1972, pre-1972, award. tribunal merit continuing really producers. 79-1896, (vacated remanded, 917, 3152, 999), 4(b) "No shall, person prejudice disadvantage, maintain service, facilities, respect, localities classes service." 717c(b). "Under prescribe, designate, keep open convenient place inspection, classifications, practices, together relate services." 717c(c). "Unless orders, charge, classification, rule, thereto, thirty Such keeping inspection stating changes force go shown, requiring herein specifying published." One weaknesses implicit parties' enable reasonableness; agreements precluded, tariff. Harlan out 338, 377, 373: construing mind evinces such. recognizes individual marked contrast shippers uniform, provision contracts." first-year student familiar rule: "Where broken, ought fairly arising naturally, i. e., according things, supposed contemplation it." Hadley Baxendale, Ex. 341, 354, 156 Eng.Rep. 151 (1854). attach fraud, 583-584, differently proved convincing evidence. Surely avoid label economic consequences. 252-253, 695-696, 912. 1018 (1976); 61,175 Utilities, plaintiff claimed injury applied past transactions affiliate allegedly unjust fraudulently ultimate alleged, diversity citizenship provide been. allegations claim. Assuming actionable absence diversity, dismiss cognizable finally, dissent fashion implied refusing create tribunal. Its read pre-empting refused charged motor little afforded Part water deliberately omitted II, carriers, judicially implied. statute. illegal sense. full statute's maintained. Abilene Cotton 204 426, 350, 553. concise statement central asserted Commission: fixes, ground one." 251-252, 695. invoking contracted. Similarly, one," distinction undercuts renders inapposite 258, relies heavily. 580-582. remotely decision. Our dissimilar litigant 580. noted, whenever 340, 379 itself: "Our empower unilaterally promotes purposes preserving integrity stability essential health industry." 344, 380. differences closely analogous. attempted sold accomplished indirectly taking steps while controlling significance. essentially situation. ultimately currently replaced United. old supersede. approval, issue. recovering confess troubled prospect speculating Whether resolving definitively. triggered. More importantly, reached contractional triggering 29, 1979. views Solicitor General. brief General behalf February 11, 1980, erred. maintained sufficiently serious warrant review, recommended defer requirement. shortly granted, reversed. requesting petition, presents concurrent jurisdiction, Respondents. Accordingly, questions." 1020 (footnote re-examined came reasons, 14, explaining prohibiting indefinite newly "However, convinced declare Pure's El Paso void voidable, strike exceedingly parts exchange arriving agreements. stricken, severability invalid, fall. problems harm public, injurious effects themselves. stricken fell, producer's constitute ex parte offerings will, unimpeded limitations presently exist. instead related permitted provisions, happened justified doing uncertainty spiraling resulting compounded times over." Pure 383, 388-389 (1961).

Category: 9