168 results for 'cat:"Water"'.
J. Pechman grants the joint stipulated motion between the environmental group and the building materials supplier for the entry of a consent decree arising from the environmental group's lawsuit, which alleges that the building materials supplier discharged polluted stormwater into navigable waters in violation of the Clean Water Act. Among other stipulations, the building materials supplier will vacuum sweep all outdoor paved surfaces of the facility at least once per week, and will also hand-sweep all indoor production areas of the facility at least once per day.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Pechman, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv1636, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: Environment, water
J. Pena finds that the trial court properly dismissed a water district’s attempt to validate the draft of a deal it made with the federal government over the ongoing delivery of water from a federal reclamation project and repayments. The trial court could not validate the draft agreement because it was materially incomplete, lacking sufficient detail about the water district's repayment obligations. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Pena, Filed On: September 1, 2023, Case #: F083632, Categories: water
J. Barringer finds the administrative law judge properly granted the mining company's petition for a pollutant discharge permit. The voluminous findings of fact made in relation to the request, none of which were challenged on appeal, indicate the judge completed the required analysis and followed applicable regulatory guidelines. Affirmed.
Court: North Carolina Supreme Court, Judge: Barringer, Filed On: September 1, 2023, Case #: 306A20, Categories: Civil Procedure, Environment, water
J. Spain finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the property owners who sued a manufacturing facility that was allegedly responsible for the flooding of their homes during Hurricane Harvey. There was sufficient evidence that the facility's negligently-built drainage system caused the flooding. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Spain, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 14-22-00013-CV, Categories: Property, water, Negligence
J. Peterson denies the city's motion to exclude Dr. William Desvousges' second opinion, sans his opinions on Lower Duwamish Waterway (LDW) anglers feeding on certain fish, from the city's lawsuit alleging that Monsanto Co. manufactured and sold polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) that contaminated the LDW and the city's stormwater and drainage systems. Desvousges adequately supports his assertion that industrialization and not PCBs limited the LDW's recreational use by citing evidence such as how the city's public utilities strategic advisor managing the LDW sediment program said that PCBs do not prevent recreational fishing.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Peterson, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: 2:16cv107, NOS: Torts to Land - Real Property, Categories: water, Experts, Discovery
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Staab finds that the lower court improperly ruled on a water rights dispute in which an irrigation district applied to amend one of its water rights certificates. Both the lower court and the Pollution Control Hearings Board, which ruled against the district, went beyond their authority in trying to decide the case on summary judgment. This is largely due to the fact that the pollution board only addressed part of the issue while it reviewed the Department of Ecology's motion for summary judgment, so further proceedings with the pollution board are needed to review the factual issues at hand. Reversed in part.
Court: Washington Court Of Appeals, Judge: Staab, Filed On: August 17, 2023, Case #: 38897-2-III, Categories: Environment, water
J. Fischer finds that the Public Service Commission improperly granted the water utility and developer’s joint application for a variance from the utility’s tariff governing the funding of water main extensions. There is no language in the rule that allows for a variance, so the Commission lacks the authority to grant a variance. Reversed.
Court: Missouri Supreme Court, Judge: Fischer, Filed On: August 15, 2023, Case #: SC99978, Categories: water, Agency
J. Edwards finds the homeowners’ association has failed to refute the trial court’s denial of its petition for review of an administrative law judge’s decision against it in their dispute with homeowners over permitting for a stormwater management system. The administrative law judge’s decision recommending to the stormwater management district that the disputed permit should not be granted was based on substantial evidence in part regarding the system’s compliance with codes, adheres to essential requirements of law and allows the district to make a final determination on the permit. The matter is remanded to the district to enter a final decision, which can then be appealed if the losing side desires.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Edwards, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 22-2426, Categories: Administrative Law, water, Agency
J. Jewell finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the individual accused of causing drainage issues on her neighbors' property through the excavation of sand on her land. The neighbors did not establish that the individual's sand excavation activities caused damage to their property. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Jewell, Filed On: August 10, 2023, Case #: 14-22-00497-CV, Categories: Property, water, Injunction
J. Clark affirms the state government department's July 2023 orders denying stays regarding the property owners' claim that the water diversions from the Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) would not have caused substantial harm to the Klamath Tribe. Diverting the water from UKL as the property owners intended would have brought UKL to lake levels that would leave the tribe's water rights unfulfilled, which qualifies as substantial harm because that would deprive the tribe, fish listed under the Endangered Species Act, and senior appropriators of the necessary water.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Clarke, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv930, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Environment, Native Americans, water
J. St. Eve finds that the lower court properly found for the defendant city in a dispute with a rural water association over another city's decision to buy water from defendant city rather than the association. The association does not have a legal right to provide water to the purchasing city because its facilities are not designed to produce sufficient water under Illinois law. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: St. Eve, Filed On: August 8, 2023, Case #: 22-2942, Categories: water, Contract
J. Richardson finds the lower court properly determined that the shrimp trawlers are not violating the Clean Water Act. Returning bycatch to the ocean is not discharging a pollutant, so the act allows throwing it overboard without a permit. The trawl nets merely kick up sediment already present in the sound, so their use does not discharge any pollutants either. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Richardson, Filed On: August 7, 2023, Case #: 21-2184, Categories: Environment, water
J. Shubb enters a consent agreement between the state corrections department and a nonprofit and county in which the department agrees to pay $1.7 million for their investigative costs and attorney fees, and will repair a wastewater system and implement a water pollution prevention plan, among other things.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Shubb, Filed On: August 2, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv2482 , NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: Environment, Settlements, water
J. Rodriguez finds a lower court ruled correctly in determining that an existing mineral lessee, and not a separate company that later entered a water-rights contract with the surface owners, owns the rights to produced water from a hydraulic fracking operation. While the contracts at first may seem contradictory on this front, the contracts were created within “a legal framework distinguishing oil and gas waste from groundwater” and categorizing produced water as “within the former,” and therefore rights to produced water fall within the mineral lessee’s mineral rights. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Rodriguez, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 08-22-00037-CV, Categories: Energy, Real Estate, water
J. Woodcock finds that a civil action against multiple companies allegedly involved in contaminating public water sources with hazardous chemicals called PFAs must be remanded to state court. Because the state has issued an "express and enforceable disclaimer against seeking recovery in this lawsuit from the defendants for claims relating to aqueous film-forming foam, the sole basis for federal jurisdiction," the federal court lacks jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Maine, Judge: Woodcock, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv210, NOS: Tort Product Liability - Real Property, Categories: water, Product Liability, Jurisdiction
J. Clement finds the Court of Appeals improperly reversed the trial court’s dismissal of claims arising from the commission’s modification of a storm water drainage system, allegedly causing flooding onto the resort’s property. Though the sewage-disposal-system-event claim, which seeks relief only in connection with flooding that occurred within the three-year window, was timely, the commission is immune with respect to common law trespass-nuisance claims. This claim was properly dismissed at trial and injunctive relief for this sought by the resort is invalid. The trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded. The Court of Appeals’ holding that the trespass-nuisance claim was timely is vacated as unnecessary.
Court: Michigan Supreme Court, Judge: Clement, Filed On: July 24, 2023, Case #: 163949, Categories: Municipal Law, Tort, water
J. Hicks affirms a summary judgment in favor of an insured company against its insurer, who didn’t cover water damage from an overflow of water from a shower drain, which it claimed was a condition falling under an exclusion from coverage. However, the exclusion was worded ambiguously and didn’t include the word “shower,” so it was unclear that the exclusion applied to the insured’s situation.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court, Judge: Hicks, Filed On: July 20, 2023, Case #: 2021-0376, Categories: Insurance, water, Damages
J. Briones denies efforts by New Mexico water regulators to dismiss, for lack of jurisdiction, a lawsuit brought by El Paso water regulators seeking to determine responsibility for mitigation and clean-up following “record rainfall” in the region in August 2021, which ultimately caused sewage to be diverted into the Rio Grande following a pipe rupture. While New Mexico regulators now argue this court does not have jurisdiction, the New Mexico water authority “purposefully directed its activities towards Texas through its enforcement actions,” and those compliance actions — if upheld — “would require EP Water to perform activities in Texas.”
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Briones, Filed On: July 18, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv460, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: Constitution, water, Jurisdiction
J. Lambert finds for the property owner in his wide-ranging lawsuit involving property boundaries and historic ownership dating back to the 19th century against the city, his neighbors, nearby landowners and others, which stems from a dispute starting in 2005 over docks on his and his neighbors' waterfront properties and their respective riparian rights. In part because the trial court incorrectly determined it was undisputed that a portion of the easternmost part of the owner's property and adjacent unplatted land was owned by the city as sovereign, the trial court's summary judgment order in favor of the city and the neighbors is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. The trial court's denial of the property owner's motion for attorney fees is upheld without discussion. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Lambert, Filed On: July 14, 2023, Case #: 21-2407, Categories: Property, water, Contract
J. Palafox withdraws this court’s previous opinion issued on March 8, 2023, and substitutes it for one finding the lower court did not err in granting summary judgment to a groundwater district and local official in a water dispute. An interested investment company alleged it had wrongfully been denied party status in a third party’s water application renewal process, but the investment company could neither show how it exhausted administrative remedies nor how it can overcome governmental immunity. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Palafox, Filed On: July 10, 2023, Case #: 08-21-00200-CV, Categories: Government, water, Immunity
J. Tymkovich finds that the lower court properly ruled in favor of the government in a dispute over a water contract deal between the Bureau of Reclamation and the state of Utah over the water distribution from the Green River Basis. Environmental groups claim that the deal was approved without carrying out the proper "hard look" into how the deal would impact the environment, such as local fish. The deal does not drastically change the water or fish resources, however, because the main thrust of the deal only affects the state's point of diversion from the water source, not the amount of water to which the state is already entitled. Because of the relatively little change taking place, the methodology and materials used by the feds passes muster. Affirmed.
Court: 10th Circuit, Judge: Tymkovich, Filed On: July 10, 2023, Case #: 21-4098, Categories: Environment, water, Agency
J. Blake finds that a land court judge correctly determined a zoning board of appeals was wrong to deny a special permit to an applicant looking to build a pier over a saltmarsh. The area at the end of the pier, where the pier would touch the water, is a tidal flat just past the saltmarsh, not a tidal creek that is part of the saltmarsh. Affirmed.
Court: Massachusetts Court Of Appeals, Judge: Blake, Filed On: July 6, 2023, Case #: 22-P-803, Categories: Environment, Zoning, water