In a case of first impression, this appeal presents us with three questions that arise from applying the Retail Electric Suppliers Act. First, can an oral agreement between a city manager and the general manager of an electric cooperative allowing the city to provide electricity to a territory outside that city be enforceable, even though that agreement has not been approved by the Commission as required by the Act? Second, can the equitable doctrines of laches, estoppel, and waiver render such a contract valid, even though that contract is void according to the statutes? Third, may a supplier of electricity receive compensation under the Act after a city annexes part of that supplier’s territory even if the supplier had not been serving customers in the area because of an informal agreement between the parties?
Read the opinion: KS Court of Appeals.
