STOCK TITAN
  1. Home
  2. Sec-filings
  3. RYES
  4. [8-K] Rise Gold Corp. Reports Material Event

Summary judgment in Clean Water Act case hits Rise Gold (RYES) project

Filing Impact
(Moderate)
Filing Sentiment
(Neutral)
Form Type
8-K

Rhea-AI Filing Summary

Rise Gold Corp. reported that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California has granted summary judgment in favor of Community Environmental Advocates in Case 2:24-cv-03643, in litigation over alleged unpermitted pollutant discharges from historic Idaho-Maryland mine shafts under the Clean Water Act.

The company’s subsidiary Rise Grass Valley is the defendant and continues to dispute that mine water below 200 feet is causing any violations, citing its sampling, geological conditions, and the presence of other pollutants that it says could not originate from the mine. Management and legal counsel are reviewing the ruling.

Rise notes that it acquired the Idaho-Maryland property in 2017, later submitted a dewatering and reopening permit application with an NPDES permit and water treatment plant in 2019, and that Nevada County denied the project’s environmental review and conditional use permit in 2024.

Positive

  • None.

Negative

  • None.

Insights

Adverse summary judgment raises environmental and legal uncertainty for Rise Gold.

The U.S. District Court granted summary judgment for Community Environmental Advocates in a Clean Water Act case involving alleged discharges from historic Idaho-Maryland mine shafts. This moves the dispute beyond early stages and may increase exposure to court-imposed remedies.

Rise Gold highlights its own sampling results, geological explanations and the presence of pollutants like E. Coli and toluene, arguing these do not support the allegations and that the summary judgment standard was misapplied. However, the court’s ruling currently favors the plaintiff.

Future steps, such as potential appeals or further proceedings on remedies, are not detailed here, but management and lawyers are reviewing the decision. For investors, this adds regulatory and litigation risk around a core asset already facing permitting setbacks, including Nevada County’s 2024 denial of the mine’s environmental review and conditional use permit.

Item 8.01 Other Events Other
Voluntary disclosure of events the company deems important to shareholders but not covered by other items.
Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits Exhibits
Financial statements, pro forma financial information, and exhibit attachments filed with this report.
Court case number 2:24-cv-03643 U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California
Depth of non-owned ground above shafts 200 feet Top vertical section above alleged discharge area
Idaho-Maryland property acquisition year 2017 Year Rise Gold acquired property and mineral estate
Permit application timing November 2019 Application to dewater and reopen Idaho-Maryland Mine
Local EIR and CUP denial year 2024 Nevada County denial of environmental review and project permit
Clean Water Act regulatory
"in violation of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311 (a), 1365 (a), and 1365 (f)"
A U.S. federal law that sets rules for protecting rivers, lakes and coastal waters by controlling pollution from pipes, runoff and industrial discharges—like neighborhood rules that stop businesses from dumping waste into a shared pond. Investors pay attention because the law determines permits, cleanup responsibilities, potential fines and operating costs for companies with water-related operations, and those obligations can materially affect cash flow, project timelines and asset values.
Summary Judgment regulatory
"has ruled in favor of Community Environmental Advocates ("CEA") and has granted Summary Judgment"
Summary judgment is a court decision made without a full trial when a judge concludes there is no real dispute about the important facts and one side wins as a matter of law. For investors it matters because such a ruling can quickly end litigation that might otherwise drag on, reducing uncertainty about potential liabilities, legal costs and impacts on a company’s stock price — like a referee stopping a game when the outcome is clear.
NPDES Permit regulatory
"The Project would include an NPDES Permit and a water treatment plant"
Environmental Impact Report regulatory
"Nevada County denied the project's Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and Conditional Use Permit in 2024"
Conditional Use Permit regulatory
"denied the project's Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and Conditional Use Permit in 2024"
A conditional use permit is a government approval that allows a property or business to operate in a way not normally allowed under local zoning rules, provided it meets specific requirements or limits. For investors it matters because the permit can unlock a project's value or revenue but also imposes conditions, timelines and compliance risks that affect costs, approval uncertainty and the asset’s resale appeal—think of it as permission to proceed with strings attached.
forward-looking statements regulatory
"This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws"
Forward-looking statements are predictions or plans that companies share about what they expect to happen in the future, like estimating sales or profits. They matter because they help investors understand a company's outlook, but since they are based on guesses and assumptions, they can sometimes be wrong.
Understanding 8-K Material Events →
false 2026-05-20 0001424864 Rise Gold Corp. 0001424864 2026-05-20 2026-05-20

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
___________________________

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): May 20, 2026

RISE GOLD CORP.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Nevada 000-53848 30-0692325
(State or other jurisdiction (Commission (IRS Employer
of incorporation) File Number) Identification No.)

345 Crown Point Circle, Suite 600
 Grass Valley, California, United States 95945
 (Address of principal executive offices) (ZIP Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (530) 271-0679

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:

☐ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)

☐ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)

☐ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))

☐ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class   Trading Symbols   Name of each exchange on which registered
N/A   N/A   N/A

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§ 230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§ 240.12b -2 of this chapter).

Emerging growth company ☐

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

 

Item 8.01 Other Events.

In its May 20, 2026 press release, Rise Gold Corp. (the "Company") announced that the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, has ruled in favor of Community Environmental Advocates ("CEA") and has granted Summary Judgment in Case Number 2:24-cv-03643.  As previously disclosed in the Company's regulatory filings, CEA brought suit against Rise Grass Valley Inc. ("Rise"), a subsidiary of the Company, alleging that Rise is responsible for pollutants entering into a local creek without a permit, in violation of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311 (a), 1365 (a), and 1365 (f). 

The suit alleges that three discharges containing metals, including arsenic, come from water from historic Idaho-Maryland mine shafts.  Rise does not own the surface drains.  Nor does Rise own the top two hundred vertical feet of ground where the shafts are located.  The mine shafts in question were decommissioned long ago and covered up with buildings located on top of them.  No sampling of water in the mine shafts has occurred below 200 feet of the surface where the alleged discharges are occurring.  Rise has sampled water in the mine at the New Brunswick shaft, and no arsenic was detected.  The bedrock near the alleged discharge locations points is comprised of serpentinite, which contains significant quantities of naturally occurring arsenic. The near-surface bedrock is highly fractured, allowing rain and ground water to dissolve the arsenic.  The bedrock becomes more competent at depth, where the Rise's mine workings are located.  Rise's water samples also show that the water at depth is deoxygenated.  Since acid rock drainage requires oxygen, it is unlikely that water in the mine is picking up arsenic and other metals.  The alleged discharges also notably include other pollutants like E. Coli, coliform, and toluene, none of which could have originated from the mine.

A summary judgment proceeding requires the judge to construe any disputed facts in favor of the non-moving party.  Rise disputes the allegation that the water in the mine below 200 feet is causing any discharge that violates the Clean Water Act.  Rise also notes that there is no evidence that the culvert alleged discharging the water is connected to the shaft.  Nor is there any evidence that the shaft, which was decommissioned a century ago, remains connected to the mine workings. Rise believes that, by assuming that the CEA's allegations are true, the judge misapplied the standard for summary judgment.

Rise management and its lawyers are reviewing the ruling.

Additional information is provided in the news release issued by the Company on May 20, 2026, a copy of which is filed herewith as Exhibit 99.1.

Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits

Exhibit
No.		 Description
   
99.1 Press release dated May 20, 2026
104 Cover Page Interactive Data File (embedded within the Inline XBRL document)

 

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

Date:  May 22, 2026

RISE GOLD CORP.

/s/ David Watkinson
David Watkinson
President and CEO

 

.

Rise Gold Provides Litigation Update

May 20, 2026 - Grass Valley, California - Rise Gold Corp. (CSE: RISE, OTCQB: RYES) (the "Company") announces that the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, has ruled in favor of Community Environmental Advocates ("CEA") and has granted Summary Judgment in Case Number 2:24-cv-03643.  As previously disclosed in the Company's regulatory filings, CEA brought suit against Rise Grass Valley Inc. ("Rise"), a subsidiary of the Company, alleging that Rise is responsible for pollutants entering into a local creek without a permit, in violation of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311 (a), 1365 (a), and 1365 (f). 

The suit alleges that three discharges containing metals, including arsenic, come from water from historic Idaho-Maryland mine shafts.  Rise does not own the surface drains.  Nor does Rise own the top two hundred vertical feet of ground where the shafts are located.  The mine shafts in question were decommissioned long ago and covered up with buildings located on top of them.  No sampling of water in the mine shafts has occurred below 200 feet of the surface where the alleged discharges are occurring.  Rise has sampled water in the mine at the New Brunswick shaft, and no arsenic was detected.  The bedrock near the alleged discharge locations points is comprised of serpentinite, which contains significant quantities of naturally occurring arsenic. The near-surface bedrock is highly fractured, allowing rain and ground water to dissolve the arsenic.  The bedrock becomes more competent at depth, where the Rise's mine workings are located.  Rise's water samples also show that the water at depth is deoxygenated.  Since acid rock drainage requires oxygen, it is unlikely that water in the mine is picking up arsenic and other metals.  The alleged discharges also notably include other pollutants like E. Coli, coliform, and toluene, none of which could have originated from the mine.

A summary judgment proceeding requires the judge to construe any disputed facts in favor of the non-moving party.  Rise disputes the allegation that the water in the mine below 200 feet is causing any discharge that violates the Clean Water Act.  Rise also notes that there is no evidence that the culvert alleged discharging the water is connected to the shaft.  Nor is there any evidence that the shaft, which was decommissioned a century ago, remains connected to the mine workings.

David Watkinson, CEO of Rise Gold, commented: "The Clean Water Act requires an addition of pollutants to create liability. The CEA did not show nor even attempt to show that the metals being deposited into the creek originated from mining operations.  The plaintiff also ignores that known pollutants that are allegedly being added could not have come from the mine.  By assuming that the CEA's allegations are true, the judge misapplied the standard for summary judgment."

- 2 -

Rise acquired the Idaho-Maryland Property and its mineral estate in 2017, and the discharges at issue were allegedly occurring prior to Rise acquiring the property and mineral estate.  Rise submitted a Permit Application to dewater and reopen the Idaho-Marland Mine in November 2019.  The Project would include an NPDES Permit and a water treatment plant. Nevada County denied the project's Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and Conditional Use Permit in 2024.

Rise management and its lawyers are reviewing the ruling.

About Rise Gold Corp.

Rise Gold is an exploration-stage mining company incorporated in Nevada, USA. The Company's principal asset is the historic past-producing Idaho-Maryland Gold Mine located in Nevada County, California, USA.

For further information, please contact:

RISE GOLD CORP.

345 Crown Point Circle, Suite 600

Grass Valley, CA 95945

T: (530) 271-0679 Ext 101

ceo@risegoldcorp.com 
www.risegoldcorp.com

The CSE has not reviewed, approved or disapproved the contents of this news release.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Forward-looking statements are frequently characterized by words such as "plan", "expect", "project", "intend", "believe", "anticipate", "estimate" and other similar words or statements that certain events or conditions "may" or "will" occur. 

Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, there can be no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. Such forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions related to certain factors including, without limitation, obtaining all necessary approvals, meeting expenditure and financing requirements, compliance with environmental regulations, title matters, operating hazards, metal prices, political and economic factors, competitive factors, general economic conditions, relationships with vendors and strategic partners, governmental regulation and supervision, seasonality, technological change, industry practices, and one-time events that may cause actual results, performance or developments to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements.  Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and information contained in this release. Rise undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements or information except as required by law.

Source: View Original Filing on SEC EDGAR

FAQ

What litigation update did Rise Gold Corp. (RYES) disclose?

Rise Gold disclosed that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California granted summary judgment in favor of Community Environmental Advocates in Case 2:24-cv-03643, a Clean Water Act lawsuit involving its subsidiary Rise Grass Valley and alleged discharges from historic Idaho-Maryland mine shafts.

What is the Clean Water Act dispute involving Rise Gold’s Idaho-Maryland property?

Community Environmental Advocates sued Rise Grass Valley, alleging responsibility for pollutants entering a local creek without a permit, tied to water from historic Idaho-Maryland mine shafts. The claims reference metals including arsenic and cite alleged discharges governed by Clean Water Act provisions 33 U.S.C. 1311(a), 1365(a) and 1365(f).

How does Rise Gold respond to the court’s summary judgment ruling?

Rise Gold disputes that mine water below 200 feet is causing any Clean Water Act violation. It points to its water sampling, geological conditions, and other pollutants like E. Coli and toluene, and believes the judge misapplied the summary judgment standard. Management and lawyers are reviewing the ruling.

What permitting history did Rise Gold provide for the Idaho-Maryland Mine?

Rise Gold acquired the Idaho-Maryland property and mineral estate in 2017, then submitted a permit application in November 2019 to dewater and reopen the mine, including an NPDES permit and water treatment plant. Nevada County later denied the project’s Environmental Impact Report and Conditional Use Permit in 2024.

Does Rise Gold claim ownership of the surface area above the alleged discharge points?

Rise states that it does not own the surface drains or the top two hundred vertical feet of ground where the relevant shafts are located. The company notes the mine shafts were decommissioned long ago, are covered by buildings, and that no sampling has occurred below 200 feet at the alleged discharge locations.

What technical arguments does Rise Gold make about arsenic and other pollutants?

Rise explains that near-surface serpentinite bedrock contains naturally occurring arsenic and is highly fractured, allowing water to dissolve arsenic. It reports deoxygenated water at depth, arguing this makes acid rock drainage unlikely, and notes pollutants like E. Coli, coliform and toluene allegedly present could not have originated from the mine.

Filing Exhibits & Attachments

6 documents

Press Releases

Other Documents