James Lane Buckley
How Judge Buckley rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Buckley no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Buckley
James Lane Buckley was a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Judge Buckley received a commission on December 17, 1985. Judge Buckley assumed senior status on August 31, 1996 and served until death on August 18, 2023.
How Judge Buckley decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Greensboro Lumber v. FERC, Buckley affirmed the agency's waiver decisions after finding the statute ambiguous, its interpretation reasonable, and no departure from prior agency interpretation.
“Because the Commission reasonably interpreted section 210 to allow such waivers and did not depart from any prior interpretation, we follow the rule of Chevron and affirm the Commission’s decisions.”
Procedural preferences
In Moraine Pipeline v. FERC, Buckley granted review and remanded because the Commission had not adequately addressed Moraine's argument about the pipeline's effective capacity.
“Because the Commission failed adequately to address certain of Moraine’s arguments regarding its effective capacity, we grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.”
In Town of Norwood v. FERC, Buckley dismissed the town's refund petition for lack of jurisdiction because it had not raised the argument in its rehearing application to the Commission.
“Because we find that the Town failed to present its argument for such refunds in an application for rehearing before the Commission, we dismiss this petition for want of jurisdiction pursuant to section 313 of the Federal Power Act”
Cautions
In Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. v. FERC, Buckley vacated an interim pipeline rule because FERC had supplied no evidence beyond its asserted expertise to justify dispensing with notice and comment.
“FERC has claimed good cause without offering any evidence, beyond its asserted expertise, as to why the public interest is served by the immediate implementation of the interim rule.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, the petition for review is Denied.”
“Accordingly, the petition is granted and the interim rule vacated.”
“Because FERC has established a sufficient basis for jurisdiction over the Damariscotta Mills hydropower project, the petition for review is Denied.”
“Because we find that the Town failed to present its argument for such refunds in an application for rehearing before the Commission, we dismiss this petition for want of jurisdiction pursuant to section 313 of the Federal Power Act”
“Although the Commission had the power to adjust Seattle’s annual charges prospectively, neither the Act nor the license authorized FERC to impose retroactive rate increases. Accordingly, we grant the petition for review and vacate the Commission’s orders holding Seattle liable for extra annual charges from 1977 through 1983.”
“As petitioners have failed to show they do not already have the authority required to provide the services applied for, their petitions for review are denied.”
“We deny the Cities’ petitions for review in their entirety. We also deny Edison’s challenges to the price discrimination analyses and findings. But we grant Edison’s petitions for review on the critical issue of competitive harm.”
“Because the Commission reasonably interpreted section 210 to allow such waivers and did not depart from any prior interpretation, we follow the rule of Chevron and affirm the Commission’s decisions.”
“Because the Commission failed adequately to address certain of Moraine’s arguments regarding its effective capacity, we grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.”
“Because the Commission has failed to explain the basis for its decision, we deny FERC’s motion for summary affirmance, grant Gulf States’ petition for review, and remand the case to the Commission for further consideration.”
“As ANR has not established that the material facts presented by Conoco in support of its applications for section 102(d) determinations were either untrue or misleading, and as section 503(d) does not require that such a determination be reopened on the basis of later-discovered evidence, ANR’s petition for review is Denied.”
“As the district court properly concluded that section 2J1.6 of the Sentencing Guidelines required that Williams’s sentence be enhanced on the basis of the crime for which he was indicted, the sentence is Affirmed.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Not applicable to this circuit-court record.
A historical record
Judge Buckley no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.