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 a North Carolina town and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) did not violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in connection with the siting of a wastewater treatment facility in an African-American neighborhood. The court fi...
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 failure of the United States to regulate the passage of a ship carrying nuclear waste through waters in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is not a major federal action. Therefore, the court dismisses an environmental group's National Environmental Policy Act claims agai...
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 ...
In November 1995, five federal agencies—the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration—issued joint guidance concerning wetland mitigation banking. The guidance's chief virtue is its detailed explanation of the approval process for the establishment and operation of mitigation banks. Its chief flaw, however, flows from the complexity of this approval process.