Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Eminent domain has divided pipeline developers, landowners, environmentalists, and the government in a recent series of high profile cases involving natural gas pipeline projects. For example, the Third Circuit in In re PennEast Pipeline Co., LLC, 938 F.3d 96 (3d Cir. 2019), held that eminent domain cannot be used to acquire state lands. And the D.C. Circuit, animated by concern about the ability for pipeline developers to use eminent domain long before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the courts finally resolve challenges to FERC's certificates approving such infrastructure projects, recently overturned 30 years of jurisdiction-related precedents in Allegheny Defense Project, et al. v. FERC, No. 17-1098, 2020 WL 3525547 (D.C. Cir. Jun. 30, 2020) (en banc). The U.S. Supreme Court has signaled its interest in eminent domain by inviting the Solicitor General to address whether certiorari should be granted in PennEast.
This article focuses on a recent decision upholding a pipeline developer's exercise of eminent domain under New York law in National Fuel Gas Supply Corp. v. Schueckler, 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 03563, 2020 WL 3453939 (June 25, 2020). (Note: The authors represented National Fuel.) The Court held that National Fuel satisfied the New York Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL) section 206(A) because it possessed a FERC certificate of public convenience and necessity. The Court's holding was narrow, strictly focused on EDPL 206(A)'s statutory requirements. Had the Court of Appeals ruled differently, however, it would have threatened the ability of developers to invoke eminent domain under New York law in connection with a broader range of projects wholly unrelated to FERC certificates.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.