The court affirms a district court's grant of summary judgment to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on a toxicologist's claim that EPA violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) by hiring a contractor to convene and conduct an external peer review of benzene's carcinogenic effec...
The court holds that a district court abused its discretion in denying a landowner's motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent the taking of its property by a local port authority. The district court denied the landowner's motion for a preliminary injunction because it failed to show a threat o...
The court holds that congressional representatives lack standing to sue to enjoin implementation of the President's American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which was established by executive order. The representatives claim that by issuing the Executive Order, the president denied them their proper rol...
The court holds that under Maine law, the doctrine of res judicata bars a town from suing a gasoline company for environmental damage affecting the town's water supply insofar as the state previously litigated and settled claims against the same company for the same environmental damage. The court f...
The court holds that the doctrine of res judicata does not bar nuclear utilities' claims that they were improperly charged by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for decontamination and decommissioning costs in its contracts for enriched uranium during the time period after the Energy Policy Act ena...
The court dismisses as unripe a developer's civil rights action against a city, a state environmental protection agency, agency employees, and a citizen group that allegedly opposed the developer's construction of a residential subdivision within the city's watershed. The court first holds that the ...
The court holds that a Native American council and an environmental group lack standing under the Federal Power Act (FPA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to challenge a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) order authorizing a Canadian power generator to sell power in the Unit...
The court holds that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' denial of landowners' Clean Water Act §404 permit application effected a permanent taking of their property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. The court first holds that the landowners' claim is ripe. Even if more information were offered by ...
The 1990s mark the end of an era when pitched legislative battles can lead to either sound or timely public policy. Rather, the formulation of consensus by a critical mass of private-sector stakeholders is the only way to achieve the timely reauthorization of Superfund and may be the best (if not the only) way to break the gridlock that paralyzes other legislative debates.
Editors' Summary: Property owners often respond to solid and hazardous waste contamination of their properties by cleaning up the contamination and then seeking reimbursement of cleanup costs from responsible parties under federal and state hazardous waste laws. RCRA is one such law; however, RCRA §7002 does not explicitly provide for recovery of damages. A court faced with a RCRA §7002 citizen suit to recover cleanup costs must imply a private cause of action for damages. This Article addresses the availability of a private cause of action for damages under RCRA §7002.