United States v. Appalachian Electric Power Co.

311 U.S. 377 (1940)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Appalachian Electric Power Co.

United States Supreme Court
311 U.S. 377 (1940)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

Appalachian Electric Power Company (Appalachian) (defendant) began building a hydroelectric dam on the New River in Virginia without a federal permit. The Federal Water Power Act of 1920 authorized the Federal Power Commission to license dam projects. Anyone intending to build a dam had to file a declaration with the commission. If the dam would not affect interstate or foreign commerce, the commission approved construction; otherwise, a license was required. After Appalachian’s predecessor declared intent to build the dam, the commission recommended that Appalachian apply for a license. The commission found the New River was nonnavigable as defined under the 1920 act but that the dam would affect interstate and foreign commerce interests. The commission provided a standard-form license that Appalachian declined because the conditions concerning rates, accounts, and eventual acquisition of the dam were unrelated to navigation. Appalachian insisted the commission lacked jurisdiction over the project but offered to accept a “minor-part” license with only those conditions related to navigation. Appalachian sued to keep the commission from interfering with the project, but the court dismissed. Meanwhile, the commission found the New River navigable. Appalachian nonetheless began construction. The federal government (plaintiff) sued to stop construction without a license or require removal of the dam. The federal court found the New River nonnavigable, that the dam would not obstruct navigation or affect interstate commerce, and that the commission could not require Appalachian to obtain a license or impose conditions unrelated to navigability. After the circuit court affirmed, the Supreme Court granted review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Reed, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 816,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. 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.

Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership