Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Court of Appeals Upholds Pipeline Condemnation
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.
Statutory Framework
To construct, extend, acquire, or operate any facility for interstate transportation or sale of natural gas, the Natural Gas Act requires a company to obtain a "certificate of public convenience and necessity" from FERC. 15 U.S.C. §717f(c)(1)(A). In determining whether to issue such a certificate, FERC considers "all factors bearing on the public interest." Atl. Ref. Co. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n of N.Y., 360 U.S. 378, 391 (1959). A FERC certificate empowers the holder to acquire the land it needs "by the exercise of the right of eminent domain." 15 U.S.C. §717f(h).
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?