The U.S. Supreme Court holds that an association's claim that a National Park Service (NPS) regulation that purports to render the Contract Disputes Act (CDA) inapplicable to concession contracts is not yet ripe for adjudication. The lower courts upheld the regulation, finding that the NPS' interpre...

The court affirms in part and vacates in part a district court decision dismissing a Native American tribe's claims against a public utility, the United States, and a city that owned a hydroelectric project. The tribe claimed that the project interfered with rights under the treaty that created the ...

The court holds that a city's condemnation of five allotments of Native American lands in 1920 and the subsequent transfer of those lands to a hydroelectric power project were invalid. Under 25 U.S.C. §357, lands allotted in severalty to Native Americans may be condemned for any public purpose ...

The court affirms a district court holding that the Clean Air Act (CAA) does not preempt California's ban of the use of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) in oxygenated fuel. CAA §211(c)(4)(A) preempts state regulation of fuel for purposes of motor vehicle emissions, but California is exempt fr...

The court holds that a local coastal erosion board's issuance of a positive declaration under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) requiring oceanfront property owners to conduct a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) in connection with their proposal to install erosion ...

The court holds that New York City's sanitation department took a requisite "hard look" under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and reasonably concluded that its 1999 waste plan requiring diesel-powered sanitation trucks to transport waste from New York City to facilities in New Jer...

The court holds that in a contract dispute over the responsibility for pollution cleanup beneath a gas station, withholding assertion of a nonfrivolous claim in reliance on an agreement waiving a statute-of-limitations defense constitutes sufficient consideration under Nevada law. The current owner ...

The U.S. Supreme Court holds that in appeals arising from Agent Orange exposure, judgment as to two respondents is vacated and remanded for further consideration in light of Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28 (2002), but judgment as to other respondents is affirmed by an equally d...

The court holds that real estate developers who voluntarily participated in U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) low-income housing programs suffered a compensable, temporary, regulatory taking under the Fifth Amendment when the U.S. Congress enacted the Emergency Low-Income Housin...

The court holds that a trial court erred in its determination that real estate developers who claimed that the government's enactment of legislation relating to low-income housing programs that breached contracts between the developers and the United States did not possess protectible real property ...