Virtual Resource Room Navigation
Case Law
The following resources represent a collection of court filings and judicial opinions regarding DRBC natural gas drilling regulations. Furthermore, the decisions may be viewed via an online legal database using the mentioned docket number.
This list of cases is not exhaustive.
State of New York v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, et al.
USDC E.D. New York, No. 1:11-cv-2599
5.31.11 – New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed a lawsuit against the Corps and other federal agencies, including DRBC, for failing to conduct a full environmental review of the draft regulations pursuant to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.
8.10.11 – The case was consolidated with Damascus Citizens for Sustainability, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers et al. (1:11-cv-03857) and Delaware Riverkeeper Network et al. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1:11-cv-03780) for pretrial purposes.
11.22.11 – Plaintiff New York A.G. Schneiderman filed an amended complaint with further claims against DRBC.
6.4.12 – Federal Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s amended complaint and other plaintiffs’ complaints for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim, or in the alternative, for summary judgment.
6.4.12 – The Delaware River Basin Commission filed a motion to dismiss the complaints.
6.4.12 – Plaintiffs filed a cross-motion for summary judgment.
9.24.12 – The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The complaints are dismissed without prejudice.
The case is closed.
Delaware Riverkeeper Network et al. v. U.S. Corps of Engineers et al.
USDC E.D. New York, No. 1:11-cv-03780
8.4.11 – The Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed a lawsuit against the DRBC and the Corps for violating NEPA’s requirements to perform a full environmental review of the draft regulations.
8.11.11 – Case consolidated with State of New York v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers et al. 1:11-cv-02599) and Damascus Citizens for Sustainability, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers et al. (1:11-cv-03857) for pretrial purposes.
9.24.12 – The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The complaints are dismissed without prejudice.
The case is closed.
Damascus Citizens for Sustainability, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers et al.
USDC E.D. New York, No. 1:11-cv-03857
8.10.11 – Damascus Citizens for Sustainability filed a lawsuit against the Corps challenging the lack of a full environmental review of the draft regulations, including a health impact assessment.
8.11.11 – Case consolidated for pretrial purposes with State of New York v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers et al. 1:11-cv-02599) and Delaware Riverkeeper Network et al. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1:11-cv-03780) for pretrial purposes.
9.24.12 – The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The complaints are dismissed without prejudice.
The case is closed.
Wayne Land and Mineral Group, LLC v. Delaware River Basin Commission
USDC M.D. Pennsylvania, No. 3:16-cv-00897
Third Circuit, No. 17-1800
5.17.16 – The Wayne Land and Mineral Group, LLC filed a lawsuit DRBC’s authority to review and approve natural gas projects located within the Delaware River Basin.
7.8.16 – Defendant DRBC filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that it had planning and project review authority for any activity or facility undertaken for the purpose of managing, developing, and using water resources of the Basin, and that all projects in the Basin must be reviewed and approved by DRBC pursuant to section 3.8 of the Delaware River Basin Compact.
3.23.17 – The district court granted DRBC’s motion to dismiss with prejudice, upholding the authority of DRBC to decide on the application for review of a natural gas development project.
4.7.17 – Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, appealing the district court’s Mar. 23, 2017 order.
7.3.18 – The Third Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the lower court decision and remanded the case for reconsideration.
9.17.18 – Three Pennsylvania State Senators filed a motion to intervene to defend their “substantial protective interest” in the process of interpreting the Compact as well as their fiduciary duties as trustees of the natural resources of Pennsylvania.
5.14.19 – The district court denied their motion, stating it was not convinced that the “Senators’ participation will add anything to this litigation.”
5.21.21 – Both parties requested the court a stay of the legal action until further order of the court. The parties agreed to submit a joint report every six months informing the court about the status of litigation regarding the high-volume hydraulic fracturing ban in the Basin.
5.21.21 – The district court approved the stipulation to stay the case.
The case is currently stayed.
Yaw et al. v. The Delaware River Basin Commission
USDC E.D. Pennsylvania, No. 2:21-cv-00119
Third Circuit, No. 21-2315
1.11.21 – Plaintiffs, Pennsylvania Senators Gene Yaw and Lisa Baker, the Pennsylvania Republican Caucus, and Damascus Township filed a lawsuit seeking a determination that DRBC improperly exercised its authority by imposing a de facto moratorium on natural gas development projects within the Basin or, alternatively, that such moratorium amounted to an uncompensated taking under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
3.10.21 – Intervenor-Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
3.21.21 – Senator Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint together with the Township of Damascus, Township of Dyberry, Carbon County, and Wayne County (Municipal Plaintiffs).
3.21.21 – The district court denied Intervenor-Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as moot.
4.15.21 – The Democratic Senator Intervenors filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.
4.15.21 – Intervenor-Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
4.15.21 – Defendant DRBC filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
6.11.21 – The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss, including a memorandum of its decision. The claims of Senators Yaw, Baker and the Senate Republican Caucus are dismissed with prejudice. The claims of Municipal Plaintiffs are dismissed without prejudice.
7.2.21 – The district court dismissed Plaintiffs’ amended complaint with prejudice, dismissed Municipal Plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice, and ordered to close the case.
7.12.21 – Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, appealing the district court’s Jul. 2, 2021, order as well as the Jun. 11, 2021, order and opinion dismissing the claims of Senate Plaintiffs with prejudice and the claims of Municipal Plaintiffs without prejudice.
