State of Georgia v. Regina McCarthey
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 15142
| 11th Cir. | 2016Background
- On June 29, 2015 EPA and the Army Corps issued the Clean Water Rule defining “Waters of the United States.”
- Plaintiffs filed a district-court complaint (S.D. Ga.) and sought a preliminary injunction; the district court denied relief concluding 33 U.S.C. § 1369(b)(1) gives courts of appeals exclusive original jurisdiction.
- Plaintiffs filed a “protective” petition in this Court; that petition was transferred to the Sixth Circuit and consolidated with other petitions challenging the Rule.
- The Sixth Circuit issued a nationwide stay of the Rule (803 F.3d 804) and later held it has original jurisdiction under § 1369(b)(1) to decide the consolidated petitions (817 F.3d 261).
- The Eleventh Circuit panel solicited supplemental briefing on mootness, stays, abeyance, and preclusive effect of the Sixth Circuit decisions, heard argument, and concluded duplicative litigation should be avoided.
- The Eleventh Circuit exercised its discretion to hold this appeal in abeyance and ordered the district court to stay proceedings pending the Sixth Circuit’s decision on the Rule’s validity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether this appeal is moot given the Sixth Circuit’s nationwide stay | Stay moots need for immediate relief here | Sixth-Circuit stay does not moot the appeal; merits still contested | Court held appeal not decided on merits but stayed as duplicative; abeyance appropriate |
| Whether Eleventh Circuit should proceed while Sixth Circuit is resolving same issues | Proceed to decide jurisdictional and merits issues here | Abstain and defer to Sixth Circuit to avoid duplicative litigation | Court stayed its proceedings and held appeal in abeyance pending Sixth Circuit decision |
| Whether Sixth Circuit’s In re EPA II jurisdictional holding is binding or preclusive here | Sixth Circuit decision should control / preclusive | Not strictly binding, but persuasive; Eleventh Circuit can exercise discretion | Court treated In re EPA II as persuasive and cited prudential reasons to defer to Sixth Circuit |
| Whether district court should continue proceedings in the meantime | Plaintiffs: proceed in district court | Defendants: stay district-court proceedings pending appellate resolution | Court ordered the district court to stay all further proceedings in this case’s remaining parts |
Key Cases Cited
- Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976) (framework endorsing avoidance of duplicative federal litigation and deference where wise judicial administration dictates)
- I.A. Durbin, Inc. v. Jefferson Nat’l Bank, 793 F.2d 1541 (11th Cir. 1986) (discusses duplicative-suit doctrine and discretion to stay or dismiss to avoid parallel federal proceedings)
- In re: EPA & Dep’t of Def. Final Rule, 803 F.3d 804 (6th Cir. 2015) (Sixth Circuit issued a nationwide stay of the Clean Water Rule)
- In re: EPA & Dep’t of Def. Final Rule, 817 F.3d 261 (6th Cir. 2016) (Sixth Circuit held courts of appeals have original jurisdiction under § 1369(b)(1) over challenges to the Rule)