Shopping Bag

0 item(s) in cart/ total: $0    view cart

Environmental Law

Products (Total Items: 33 )
Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Aviall Services, Inc.
CERCLA authorizes contribution for environmental cleanup costs from other responsible parties only when the party seeking contribution has been sued under CERCLA 106 or 107(a). CERCLA liability; CERCLA contribution action.
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation v. Environmental Protection Agency
The EPA authority under the Clean Air Act includes the power to mandate the inclusion of emissions-control designations in pre-construction permits AND the power to determine whether the designations are in accord with the provisions of the Act.
United States v. Duke Energy Corp.
When Congress mandates a specific definition of a statutory term, an agency cannot interpret the meaning of the term differently under its regulations. Only increases in per hour emissions are modifications requires preapproval.
New York v. EPA
When an issue of environmental concern requires a high degree of technical expertise, the court will defer to the informed discretion of the responsible federal agency (here, the EPA).
Michigan v. EPA
The EPA may consider both the health effects of pollution and the cost of abating it when determining whether a state SIP fails to comply with the Clean Air Act. One state cannot pollute a downwind state.
Appalachian Power Co. v. EPA
Polluters may trade emissions allowances with other polluters in the state, but neighboring states may still petition the EPA for relief under the Clean Air Act.
Engine Manufacturers Association v. South Coast Air Quality Management District
The Clean Air Act makes state standards governing or enforcing emissions limits preempted for sale or purchase of vehicles; preemption.
Rapanos v. United States
Navigable waters; The phrase the waters of the United States, as used in the Clean Water Act, includes only those relatively permanent or continuously flowing bodies of water forming geographic features; wetlands are not navigable waters.
South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians
Moving pollutants between bodies of water may not require a permit. The Clean Water Act requires a permit before a pollutant may be discharged into navigable waters.
Lingle v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc.
A plaintiff seeking to challenge a government regulation as an uncompensated taking of private property may proceed only by alleging a physical taking, a total regulatory taking, a Penn Central taking, or a land-use exaction.
Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen
Environmental Assessment; when an agency has no ability to prevent a certain effect, the agency cannot be considered a legally relevant cause of such effect; so under NEPA, the agency need not consider these effects in its EA.
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance
Administrative Procedures Act allows federal courts to compel agency action unlawfully withheld and unreasonably delayed only for claims involving a specific agency action—a rule, order, license, sanction, or relief—required of agency by law.
EPA Has Discretion Regarding Standards
Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA; he Clean Air Act only mandates that residual risk standards provide an ample margin of safety to protect public health, and the EPA is free to determine that existing technology-based standards are ample.
CERCLA Liability
Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States; Mere knowledge that spills and leaks occur after the sale of a chemical product is insufficient for concluding the seller "arranged for" disposal of hazardous chemical for CERCLA liability.
Apportion Liability
Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States; CERCLA does not mandate joint and several liability; scope of liability must be determined from traditional and evolving principles of common law.
CERCLA Cost Recovery Mechanisms
United States v. Atlantic Research Corp; CERCLA § 107(a)(4)(B) provides Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) with a cause of action to recover, from other PRPs, costs voluntarily incurred in cleaning up a contaminated site; contribution.
EPA Waiver of Preemption
Central Valley Chrysler-Jeep, Inc. v. Goldstene; If the California motor vehicle emissions regulations are granted a waiver by the EPA to the Clean Air Act, enforcement is not prevented by the doctrine of conflict preemption or by express preemption.
Net Increase In Emmissions Measured Annually or Hourly
Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp; A Clean Air Act permit is required for any physical change in, or change in the method of operation of, a major stationary source that would result in a significant net emissions increase of any pollutant.
No Trading of Pollution Credits
North Carolina v. EPA; EPA is not properly exercising its duty under the Clean Air Interstate Rule unless it is promulgating a rule that achieves something measureable toward the goal of prohibiting sources within one state from affecting another state.
Fill Material Is Not a Pollutant
Coeur Alaska, In c. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council; The Army Corps of Engineers has the power to issue permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material under 33 U.S.C. § 1344(a).
NHTSA Cannot Ignore Global Warming Concerns
Center for Biological Diversity v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; NHTSA has a duty to assess environmental impacts, including impact on climate change, of rules; enviornmental impact statement.
Endangered Speciies Act
National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife; Endangered Species Act § 7(a)(2)'s application limited to actions in which discretionary federal involvement or control, and thus it does not apply in the context of mandatory EPA actions.
Greenhouse Gasses Are Pollutants
Massachusetts v. EPA Greenhouse gasses are pollutants that may be regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Political Question Doctrine
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, states can sue over global warming, case or controversy requirement. Environmental attorney. Damage to the environment.
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife
Injury in fact and redressability must be established even under a federal statute conferring a private cause of action, private right of action, standing, personal injury, public, injury in fact. Injury to the environment.
Political Question Doctrine
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, states can sue over global warming, case or controversy requirement. Environmental attorney. Damage to the environment.
Federal Common Law
American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut; The Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency action authorized by the Act displace private rights of action against greenhouse-gas emitters. EPA.
Endangerment Finding
Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA; EPA endangerment finding for greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles supported by substantial record evidence, EPA obligated to issue greenhouse gas emissions standards. Endangerment evaluation.
The Transport Rule
EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA; The Transport Rule is inconsistent with federal law; "good neighbor policy" imposes upon states an excess obligation to reduce downwind emissions; Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs).
Endangered Species Act
Friends of Blackwater v. Salazar; Endangered List recovery plan need not be strictly satisfied before a species may be delisted pursuant to the factors of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Clean Water Act
Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.; transfer of polluted water between two parts of the same body of water is not discharge of pollutants under the CWA. Clean Water Act.
Agency Action
Sackett v. EPA; The Administrative Procedure Act provides for judicial review of final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court. APA,
Takings Clause
Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Dep't of Environmental Protection; The Takings Clause protects property rights as they are established under state law, which is none here due to doctrine of avulsion. Takings analysis.