
    Argued and submitted February 7,
    affirmed April 22,
    reconsideration denied June 24, petition for review denied August 25, 1992 (314 Or 176)
    SNOW MOUNTAIN PINE COMPANY, Appellant, v. CP NATIONAL CORPORATION, Respondent.
    
    (86-04-9036-L; CA A63075)
    829 P2d 745
    Paul E. Levy, Boise, Idaho, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs were Levy Law Offices, Boise, Idaho, and David F. Bartz, Jr., and Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt, Portland.
    John Gould, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were George L. Wagner and Lane Powell Spears Lubersky, Portland.
    Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Plaintiff, a qualifying cogeneration facility, appeals from a judgment for defendant, an electric power utility. Plaintiff asserted several claims and theories, but their common theme is that defendant unlawfully refused to purchase power from plaintiff, see Snow Mt. Pine Company v. Maudlin, 84 Or App 590, 734 P2d 1366, rev den 303 Or 591 (1987), and thereby caused extensive damages to plaintiff. We agree with the trial court that, as a matter of law, any damages that plaintiff sustained as the result of its dealings with defendant were caused by its own refusal to sell the power at the rate set by the Public Utility Commission and affirmed by us. Snow Mountain Pine Co. v. PUC, 102 Or App 687, 795 P2d 611, rev den 310 Or 612 (1990), cert den_US_(1991); see also Snow Mt. Pine Company v. Maudlin, supra. Defendant had no duty to purchase power at the higher price that plaintiff had sought from the Commission and in the courts or to purchase power that plaintiff would not agree to sell at the lawful rate.

Affirmed.  