Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
David Holbrook v. Tennessee Valley Authority, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, No. 21-1415 · judgment September 7, 2022
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
The Tennessee Valley Authority (“TVA”) is an independent government corporation that leverages government power and resources to operate commercially, as an electric power company. Its enabling statute provides that its electricity plants are to be primarily “for the benefit of. . . consumers.” 16 U.S.C. § 831j. “[A]ccordingly,” Congress instructed: [S]ale to and use by industry [of TVA power] shall be a secondary purpose, to be utilized principally to secure a sufficiently high load factor and revenue returns which will permit domestic and rural use at the lowest possible rates.... (Id.) About a decade ago, TVA allegedly moved to a privatesector model, architecting a structure in which, contra the statute, load factors and revenue returns from sales to industry are not used to benefit consumers. Petitioner filed suit asserting claims for breach-of-contract, illegalexaction and under the APA. The Fourth Circuit upheld dismissal of Petitioner’s complaint, applying inter alia a new judicial-abstention doctrine which abjures judicial review of discretionary agency decision-making even where Congress provided a meaningful standard to apply. The question presented is: Do federal courts have authority to review TVA’s fidelity to its enabling statute, or is TVA’s rate-setting excepted from all judicial review even when TVA sets rates in deliberate disregard of Congress’ clearly expressed policy directive?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Martin Bienstock
Bienstock PLLC
For respondent
Cameron Scott Bell
Penn, Stuart and Eskridge
Proceedings
- Jun 12 2023Petition DENIED.
- May 23 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/8/2023.
- May 18 2023Reply of petitioner David Holbrook filed.
- May 09 2023Brief of Federal Respondent in opposition filed.
- May 09 2023Brief of respondent BVU Authority in opposition filed.
- Mar 03 2023The motions to extend the time to file responses are granted and the time is further extended to and including May 9, 2023, for all respondents.
- Mar 02 2023Motion of the Solicitor General to extend the time to file a response from March 10, 2023 to May 9, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
- Mar 02 2023Motion BVU Authority to extend the time to file a response from March 10, 2023 to May 9, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
- Feb 01 2023The motions to extend the time to file responses are granted and the time is extended to and including March 10, 2023, for all respondents.
- Jan 31 2023Motion of BVU Authority to extend the time to file a response from February 8, 2023 to March 10, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jan 30 2023Motion of the Solicitor General to extend the time to file a response from February 8, 2023 to March 10, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jan 05 2023Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 8, 2023)
- Nov 16 2022Application (22A436) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until January 5, 2023.
- Nov 14 2022Application (22A436) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 6, 2022 to January 5, 2023, submitted to The Chief Justice.