Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.
E285915
Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co. is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the modern test for evaluating state laws under the Constitution’s Contract Clause, particularly in the context of regulated utility contracts.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co. canonical | 1 |
| Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Company | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2652825 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co. Context triple: [Contract Clause, hasKeyCase, Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.]
-
A.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited courts’ ability to impose additional procedural requirements on federal agencies beyond those mandated by the Administrative Procedure Act and relevant statutes.
-
B.
Calvert Cliffs Coordinating Committee v. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
Calvert Cliffs Coordinating Committee v. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission is a landmark 1971 federal court decision that gave strong judicial force to the National Environmental Policy Act by requiring agencies to rigorously consider environmental impacts in their decision-making.
-
C.
Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.
Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. was a landmark U.S. class-action sexual harassment lawsuit brought by female mine workers in Minnesota’s Iron Range, recognized as one of the first major cases to address workplace sexual harassment in a blue-collar industry.
-
D.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
E.
Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
Carter v. Carter Coal Co. was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down federal regulation of coal production as an unconstitutional overreach of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co. Target entity description: Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co. is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the modern test for evaluating state laws under the Constitution’s Contract Clause, particularly in the context of regulated utility contracts.
-
A.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited courts’ ability to impose additional procedural requirements on federal agencies beyond those mandated by the Administrative Procedure Act and relevant statutes.
-
B.
Calvert Cliffs Coordinating Committee v. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
Calvert Cliffs Coordinating Committee v. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission is a landmark 1971 federal court decision that gave strong judicial force to the National Environmental Policy Act by requiring agencies to rigorously consider environmental impacts in their decision-making.
-
C.
Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.
Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. was a landmark U.S. class-action sexual harassment lawsuit brought by female mine workers in Minnesota’s Iron Range, recognized as one of the first major cases to address workplace sexual harassment in a blue-collar industry.
-
D.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
E.
Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
Carter v. Carter Coal Co. was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down federal regulation of coal production as an unconstitutional overreach of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Contract Clause case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ constitutional law case ⓘ |
| appliedIn | cases evaluating state interference with private commercial contracts ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
contracts ⓘ public utility regulation ⓘ |
| characteristic | deferential to state economic regulation under the Contract Clause ⓘ |
| citation | 459 U.S. 400 ⓘ |
| clarified |
distinction between substantial impairment and permissible adjustment of contractual expectations
ⓘ
role of foreseeability of regulation in assessing substantial impairment ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution
Contract Clause ⓘ |
| context |
natural gas industry regulation in the United States
ⓘ
regulated utility contracts ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1983 ⓘ |
| decisionType | majority opinion ⓘ |
| established | modern three-part test for evaluating Contract Clause challenges to state laws ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Company
|
| holding |
State regulation that substantially impairs private contracts may be upheld if it serves a significant and legitimate public purpose and is based on reasonable and appropriate means.
ⓘ
Contract Clause of the U.S. Constitution ⓘ
surface form:
The Kansas Natural Gas Price Protection Act did not violate the Contract Clause as applied to the contracts at issue.
|
| impact |
clarified the modern Contract Clause analysis for state economic and utility regulation
ⓘ
limited the scope of the Contract Clause as a constraint on state regulation of private contracts ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | Kansas ⓘ |
| languageOfProceeding | English ⓘ |
| legalDoctrine |
Contract Clause balancing test
ⓘ
deference to legislative judgment in economic regulation ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Contract Clause of the U.S. Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Contract Clause of the United States Constitution
constitutionality of state regulation affecting private contracts ⓘ state regulation of natural gas price-escalation clauses ⓘ |
| petitioner | Energy Reserves Group, Inc. ⓘ |
| precedentFor | subsequent Contract Clause cases involving state economic regulation ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
economic regulation
ⓘ
police power of the states ⓘ public utility rate regulation ⓘ |
| respondent |
Kansas City Power & Light Company
ⓘ
surface form:
Kansas Power & Light Company
|
| stateLawInvolved | Kansas Natural Gas Price Protection Act ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
long-term natural gas supply contracts
ⓘ
price-escalation clauses tied to federal regulation ⓘ |
| subjectOf | scholarly commentary on the weakening of the Contract Clause in the 20th century ⓘ |
| testElement |
whether the adjustment of the contracting parties’ rights and responsibilities is based upon reasonable conditions and is of a character appropriate to the public purpose
ⓘ
whether the state law has operated as a substantial impairment of a contractual relationship ⓘ whether the state law is drawn in an appropriate and reasonable way to advance a significant and legitimate public purpose ⓘ |
| timePeriod | 20th century ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co. Description of subject: Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co. is a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the modern test for evaluating state laws under the Constitution’s Contract Clause, particularly in the context of regulated utility contracts.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.