Pittston Coal Co. v. Babbitt

66 F.3d 714, 1995 WL 592324
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 6, 1995·No. No. 92-1606·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge HAMILTON wrote the opinion, in which Judge RUSSELL and Judge WILKINS joined.

OPINION

HAMILTON, Circuit Judge:

Appellants Pittston Company (Pittston) and Clinchfield Coal Company (Clinchfield) brought this action asserting that the proposed denial of their applications for mining permits violated their procedural due process rights. Appellees Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior, and the Commonwealth of Virginia moved to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). The district court granted the motion, holding that, pursuant to 30 U.S.C § 1276(a)(1), the case could only be brought in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Pittston Co. v. Lujan, 798 F.Supp. 344, 353 (W.D.Va.1992). Pittston and Clinchfield appeal.

We have carefully examined the record, briefs, arguments of the parties, and the opinion of the district court. We agree with the district court that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction under 30 U.S.C. § 1276(a)(1). Therefore, we affirm on the compelling reasoning of the district court.2

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pittston Coal Co. v. Babbitt, 66 F.3d 714, 1995 WL 592324 (4th Cir. 1995).

66 F.3d 714 (Pittston Coal Co. v. Babbitt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ballmer v. Babbitt
926 F. Supp. 575 (S.D. West Virginia, 1996)
Pittston Coal Company v. Bruce Babbitt
66 F.3d 714 (Fourth Circuit, 1995)