The cases listed below appear in the most recent issue of ELR's Weekly Update. For cases previously reported, please use the filter on the left.
Volume 41, Issue 15
A district court dismissed a property owner's negligence and mutual mistake claims against the former owner, as well as its request to rescind the purchase agreement, due to contamination.
A bankruptcy court held that a property owner's CERCLA and state environmental law claims against the prior property owner are not "core" claims and, thus, fall outside the jurisdiction of the owner's Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.
A California court ordered the California Air Resources Board to set aside its "functional equivalent document" and scoping plan to reduce greenhouse gases as it relates to cap and trade.
A California appellate court held that a city's revised environmental impact report (EIR) for a proposed development project along an estuary complies with the California Environmental Quality Act.
The First Circuit held that the U.S. Coast Guard violated NEPA when it issued regulations that preempt state environmental law with respect to tank vessels in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts.
The Third Circuit denied environmental groups' petition for review of an NRC decision granting a license renewal for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
A district court, on a motion to amend judgment, extended the FWS' deadline for completing its biological opinion (BiOp) for the threatened delta smelt as well as the Bureau of Reclamation's deadline to complete review of the FWS' reasonable and prudent alternative (RPA) under
The Ninth Circuit reversed a lower court decision denying the award of attorney fees to an environmental group in their lawsuit against a town for discharging toxic pollutants into a bay in violation of the CWA.
The First Circuit held that property owners have standing to challenge a settlement agreement entered into between a town and a telecommunications company over the construction of a 100-foot cell phone tower.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision excluding expert witness testimony in homeowners' toxic tort case against an oil company for benzene exposure. The homeowners alleged claims of strict liability for hazardous activity, negligence, and loss of consortium.
You must be an ELR subscriber to access the full content.
You are not logged in. To access this content: