Commonwealth of Kentucky, Energy and Environment Cabinet v. Shepherd

Summary

The Supreme Court of Kentucky affirmed the denial of petitions for writs of mandamus and prohibition concerning a Franklin Circuit Court order allowing environmental citizen plaintiffs to intervene for the limited purpose of commenting on and objecting to a proposed consent judgment. The court held that the limited intervention was not preempted by federal law and that the petitioners had an adequate remedy by appeal for alleged procedural and consent-judgment errors.

Holdings

1. The Franklin Circuit Court was acting within its jurisdiction when it permitted the Citizen Plaintiffs to intervene for the limited purpose of commenting on and objecting to the proposed consent judgment. Federal law did not preempt that limited intervention.
2. The Cabinet and Frasure Creek had an adequate remedy by appeal, so they were not entitled to extraordinary writ relief.
3. The intervention did not deprive the Cabinet or Frasure Creek of a bargained-for right that could not be remedied by appeal, because the Citizen Plaintiffs were not parties to the settlement and the petitioners remained free to stand by their agreement.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Franklin Circuit Court's limited permission for Citizen Plaintiffs to intervene in the state enforcement action was preempted by the federal Clean Water Act's jurisdictional provisions.
2. Whether the Cabinet and Frasure Creek had an adequate remedy by appeal for alleged errors concerning intervention and review of the proposed consent judgment, thereby precluding extraordinary writ relief.
3. Whether the petitioners' alleged loss of the benefits of their negotiated consent judgment justified extraordinary relief under Kentucky law.

Disposition

affirmed