Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Sanitary landfills

Strategic Environmental Partners, LLC v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

A New Jersey appellate court held that the state environmental agency exceeded its authority when it seized control of a privately owned landfill under an emergency order intended to abate an alleged imminent threat to the environment...

SPRAWLDEF v. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Comm'n

A California appellate court upheld the issuance of a county permit for a landfill expansion project in the Suisun Marsh, part of the San Francisco Bay tidal estuary. Environmental groups claimed that the permit approvals violate the...

Barge v. St. Bernard, City of

An Ohio appellate court held that a city is not immune from residents' negligence lawsuit against it concerning pollution allegedly caused by a city landfill. The city argued that it was immune from suit because the operation of the...

L.C. Dev. Co. v. Lincoln County

The court holds that a county in Missouri can regulate the location of solid waste facilities. A development company challenged a county regulation that prohibits the location of a sanitary landfill within one-quarter mile of any...

Resource Invs., Inc. v. Corps of Eng'rs

The court holds that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers lacked authority under Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) §404 to require a company to obtain a dredge and fill permit before constructing a solid waste landfill on a...

South Dakota v. Yankton Sioux Tribe

The Court holds that a landfill constructed on land ceded from the Yankton Sioux Reservation in South Dakota by an 1894 Act that diminished the boundaries of the reservation is not subject to federal environmental regulation. The Court...

Eastern Ky. Resources v. Fiscal Court of Magoffin County

The court holds that a state's solid waste disposal program that requires the identification of additional capacity for out-of-state waste before a plan is approved does not violate the U.S. Commerce Clause. The court first holds that...