Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens for a Hygienic Environment v. Eaton, No. 80-2433

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore ALDISERT and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges, and MARKEY; PER CURIAM
Citation644 F.2d 995
Decision Date30 March 1981
Docket NumberNo. 80-2433
Parties, 68 A.L.R.Fed. 697, 11 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,790 The PYMATUNING WATER SHED CITIZENS FOR A HYGIENIC ENVIRONMENT, A Pennsylvania Non-Profit corporation, v. Bert EATON, Frank Arey, Robert Hutton, Ralph Robinson, John Shutzbach, Ronald Staab, individually and as members of the Board of the North and South Shenango Joint Municipal Authority; and North and South Shenango Joint Municipal Authority; and Ontario Pipeline, Inc., a New York Corporation; and Kirila Contractors, Inc., an Ohio Corporation; and Northwest Engineering Co., a Pennsylvania Corporation; North Shenango Township, Crawford County, Pennsylvania; South Shenango Township, Crawford County, Pennsylvania; and the Koski Construction Company, an Ohio Corporation, The North and South Shenango Joint Municipal Authority, Appellant.

Page 995

644 F.2d 995
15 ERC 1937, 68 A.L.R.Fed. 697, 11
Envtl. L. Rep. 20,790
The PYMATUNING WATER SHED CITIZENS FOR A HYGIENIC
ENVIRONMENT, A Pennsylvania Non-Profit corporation,
v.
Bert EATON, Frank Arey, Robert Hutton, Ralph Robinson, John
Shutzbach, Ronald Staab, individually and as members of the
Board of the North and South Shenango Joint Municipal
Authority; and North and South Shenango Joint Municipal
Authority; and Ontario Pipeline, Inc., a New York
Corporation; and Kirila Contractors, Inc., an Ohio
Corporation; and Northwest Engineering Co., a Pennsylvania
Corporation; North Shenango Township, Crawford County,
Pennsylvania; South Shenango Township, Crawford County,
Pennsylvania; and the Koski Construction Company, an Ohio Corporation,
The North and South Shenango Joint Municipal Authority, Appellant.
No. 80-2433.
United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit.
Argued March 19, 1981.
Decided March 30, 1981.

Paul D. Shafer, Jr., (argued), Shafer, Dornhaffer, Swick & Bailey, Meadville, Pa., for appellant.

John V. Adams, Jr., (argued), Adams, Hillen & Shoemaker, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee.

Before ALDISERT and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges, and MARKEY, Chief Judge. *

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

The major question presented by this appeal brought under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a) (1) from an order of the district court requiring

Page 996

the North and South Shenango Joint Municipal Authority to propose a time-table for abating the discharge of untreated sewage into the Shenango River system is whether the district court had jurisdiction to grant relief under § 505 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365. The Joint Authority argues that the district court did not have jurisdiction over the controversy because the plaintiff did not give notice prior to filing suit as required by § 505(b) of the Act. We hold that under the circumstances of this case, the failure to give notice did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction and therefore we affirm.

I.

Appellee, the Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens for a Hygenic Environment, filed suit against various defendants on May 17, 1979, alleging violations of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The complaint alleged that untreated sewage was entering the Shenango River and its tributaries from the sewage system under the control of the Joint Authority. On June 5, 1979, defendants moved for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the appellee failed to give notice to the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 practice notes
  • Hallstrom v. Tillamook County, No. 88-42
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • November 7, 1989
    ...District Court should deem the notice requirement to be satisfied. See Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens for Hygienic Environment v. Eaton, 644 F.2d 995, 996-997 (CA3 1981). According to petitioners, a 60-day stay would serve the same function as delaying commencement of the suit: it would giv......
  • Ada-Cascade Watch Co., Inc. v. Cascade Resource Recovery, Inc., ADA-CASCADE
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • November 3, 1983
    ...similar notice requirements contained in other federal environmental statutes. 3 For example, in Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens v. Eaton, 644 F.2d 995 (3d Cir.1981), the Third Circuit approved the District Court's decision to stay proceedings in a citizen suit under the Federal Water Pollut......
  • Atlantic City Mun. Utilities v. REGIONAL ADM'R, Civ. A. No. 85-0906.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • August 27, 1985
    ...of § 1365. Id. at 26. But see Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens For a Hygienic Environment v. Eaton, 506 F.Supp. 902 (W.D.Pa.1980) aff'd 644 F.2d 995 (3d Cir.1981) (per curiam) (notice requirement is not 11 In relevant part, § 1298 provides: before the Administrator approves any grant to any .......
  • Chesapeake Bay Foundation v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., Civ. No. Y-84-1620.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Maryland)
    • May 6, 1985
    ...for more than sixty days at the time the district court acted. Accord, Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens for a Hygienic Environment v. Eaton, 644 F.2d 995 (3d Taking a pragmatic view of this case leads to the conclusion that the notice given by the plaintiffs was sufficient to satisfy the juri......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
30 cases
  • Hallstrom v. Tillamook County, No. 88-42
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • November 7, 1989
    ...District Court should deem the notice requirement to be satisfied. See Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens for Hygienic Environment v. Eaton, 644 F.2d 995, 996-997 (CA3 1981). According to petitioners, a 60-day stay would serve the same function as delaying commencement of the suit: it would giv......
  • Ada-Cascade Watch Co., Inc. v. Cascade Resource Recovery, Inc., ADA-CASCADE
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • November 3, 1983
    ...similar notice requirements contained in other federal environmental statutes. 3 For example, in Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens v. Eaton, 644 F.2d 995 (3d Cir.1981), the Third Circuit approved the District Court's decision to stay proceedings in a citizen suit under the Federal Water Pollut......
  • Atlantic City Mun. Utilities v. REGIONAL ADM'R, Civ. A. No. 85-0906.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • August 27, 1985
    ...of § 1365. Id. at 26. But see Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens For a Hygienic Environment v. Eaton, 506 F.Supp. 902 (W.D.Pa.1980) aff'd 644 F.2d 995 (3d Cir.1981) (per curiam) (notice requirement is not 11 In relevant part, § 1298 provides: before the Administrator approves any grant to any .......
  • Chesapeake Bay Foundation v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., Civ. No. Y-84-1620.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Maryland)
    • May 6, 1985
    ...for more than sixty days at the time the district court acted. Accord, Pymatuning Water Shed Citizens for a Hygienic Environment v. Eaton, 644 F.2d 995 (3d Taking a pragmatic view of this case leads to the conclusion that the notice given by the plaintiffs was sufficient to satisfy the juri......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT