From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...
Hunter v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
711 F.3d 155 (2013)
Brian Hunter (defendant) was an employee of Amaranth, a hedge fund that traded natural-gas-futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The exchange was regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) pursuant to its authority under the Commodity Exchange Act. Hunter allegedly manipulated the settlement price (i.e., the market price for a commodity future) for natural-gas-futures contracts. Hunter sold such a large quantity of futures contracts during a three-month period from February to April 2006 that his sales made up 14.4 to 19.4 percent of market volume. As a result, the settlement price for natural gas decreased, which benefited Hunter’s short position on natural gas. A speculator with a short position makes money when the price of an asset decreases. In July 2007, the CFTC brought a civil-enforcement action against Hunter for manipulating the price of natural-gas-futures contracts in violation of the Commodity Exchange Act. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) filed an administrative enforcement action against Hunter the following day for manipulation of the settlement price, which affected the price of natural gas in markets regulated by FERC, in violation of the Natural Gas Act. FERC found Hunter in violation and fined Hunter $30 million. Hunter filed a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He argued that FERC lacked authority to impose a fine against him because the CFTC had exclusive jurisdiction over commodity-futures contracts. FERC argued that it had authority to regulate manipulative trading of natural-gas-futures contracts on the commodity exchange because the Energy Policy Act of 2005 repealed the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction over natural-gas-futures contracts by implication when it created an irreconcilable conflict with the CFTC’s authority under the Commodity Exchange Act.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Tatel, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.