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 , Issue
The court holds that the U.S.
The court vacates a district court decision holding that the Endangered Species Act's (ESA's) take provision was a valid exercise of Congress' enumerated powers because the case does not present a case or controversy under Article III of the U.S. Constitution.
The Court holds that moratoria on development imposed during the process of devising a comprehensive land use plan do not constitute a per se taking of property requiring compensation under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The court affirms a district court decision denying a county's request for a preliminary injunction to prevent a city from continuing the expansion of its municipal water supply reservoir along the Nestucca River in Oregon. After the U.S.
The court affirms a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of a transit authority that was sued in a qui tam action under the False Claims Act (FCA) by an employee of one of its subcontractors, but vacates the district court's award of attorney fees to be paid by the employ
The court holds that a company is jointly and severally liable for costs incurred by the United States at the Friedrichsohn's Cooperage, Inc. site in Waterford, New York.
The court holds that cemetery owners' takings claims arising from their failure to obtain a Clean Water Act (CWA) §404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are not ripe for review.
The court certifies to the Florida Supreme Court the question of whether an insured is entitled under state law to an award of attorney fees incurred in enforcing a settlement agreement against an insurer.
The court holds that federal sovereign immunity bars an action initiated by the commonwealth of Puerto Rico's environmental agency in an effort to impose restrictions on the U.S. Navy's extraction of waters from a river.
The court reverses a district court decision holding that an environmental group's claims against the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for failing to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Endangered Species Act (ESA) before issuing a road easement are not ripe.