A district court held that the FDA violated the APA and the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) when it denied two petitions requesting that it withdraw approval of some uses of certain classes of antibiotics in food-producing animals. The petitions, submitted by environmental groups in 1999 and...
A district court held that the FDA must reconsider its approval of certain antibiotics used in animal feed unless, after a hearing, the drug uses at issue are determined to be safe. In 1977, the FDA issued notices of an opportunity for hearing (NOOHs) on proposals to withdraw penicillin and tetr...
A district court held that an oil company may not seek insurance coverage for damages it incurred following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill under the oil rig owner's insurance policies. The underlying insurance policies refer to the drilling contract between the rig owner and the oil company to dete...
A district court upheld a NMFS biological opinion (BiOp) concluding that EPA's registration decisions under FIFRA for three insecticides—chlorpyrifos, diazinon and malathion—were likely to jeopardize the continued existence of 27 protected species of salmon and steelhead fish and would destroy o...
The court holds that, as applied to industrial truck manufacturers and distributors, the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) hazard communication standard (HCS) preempt enforcement of the occupational warning requirements unde...
The court holds that a Wisconsin farming family's state-law claims against a pesticide manufacturer are preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The family filed negligence and fraudulent representation claims based on the manufacturer's alleged off-label stateme...
The court affirms that the denial of a Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) permit did not breach a contract between a developer and the government of the Virgin Islands allowing for the development of an island off the coast of St. Thomas. The court first holds that the agreement unambiguously grants...
The court holds that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts failure to warn claims brought by the purchasers of a container of chlorine tablets, but that FIFRA does not preempt their defective packaging and product design claims. The court first holds that the purch...
The court holds that shipping companies have a Fifth Amendment property interest in their single-hulled oil tankers. The companies brought suit against the United States alleging that their single-hulled tankers were effectively taken by the Oil Pollution Act requirement that all single-hulled vesse...
The court holds that plaintiffs in a toxic tort case produced sufficient evidence to show that a piece of furniture emitted levels of gaseous formaldehyde known to cause the type of injuries suffered by the plaintiffs' child. The court first holds that the plaintiffs produced substantial evidence of...