560 results for 'cat:"Environment"'.
J. Fisher finds that the lower court improperly annulled the decision authorizing an oversight agency to use an aquatic herbicide to control spread of the invasive Eurasian watermilfoil in Lake George. The board of the Adirondack Park Agency rationally approved the permit, as members received scientific studies and research demonstrating that the herbicide would be minimally harmful to native plants and water insects and more cost-effective than previously attempted eradication methods. Meanwhile, the agency was due judicial deference on factual evaluations within its area of expertise. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Fisher, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: CV-23-0672, Categories: Administrative Law, environment
[Consolidated.] J. Baltodano holds that the trial court must revisit the restitution claims of four commercial fishers who argue they lost revenue due to a crude oil spill. Neither a mediated civil settlement nor a class action lawsuit bar restitution for commercial fishers who demonstrate direct financial losses from the criminally unlawful discharge. However, the trial court properly denied restitution to oil platform employees who relied on the oil industry since the income they lost when the pipeline shut down made them only indirect victims. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Baltodano, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: B315256, Categories: Restitution, environment, Criminal Negligence
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
[Consolidated.] J. Walker refuses to grant petitions for review filed by environmental groups that challenge the Federal Energy Regulator Commission's certification of an expansion of pipelines and facilities for the Evangeline Pass Expansion Project in the Southeastern U.S. The agency reasonably explained its decision, and the certification was reasonable.
Court: DC Circuit, Judge: Walker, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 22-1101 , Categories: Administrative Law, Energy, environment
J. Ezra partially grants Texas’ motion to dismiss after the federal government sued the state and Governor Greg Abbott over its “buoy barrier” in the Rio Grande, which was installed in the national water boundary “without any federal authorization.” While the United States can proceed with claims under the federal Rivers and Harbors Act, it cannot pursue claims based on the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo because the treaty is “not self-executing” and does not “provide any specific standard or rule of decision for a domestic court to follow.” Nonetheless, while Texas has asserted that it has “territorial rights” to protect itself from a migrant “invasion,” “the Founding Fathers conceptualized invasions as a part of war” and not due to migration.
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Ezra, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv853, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment, Government, Immigration
[Consolidated.] J. Moll finds the lower court erroneously sustained the adjacent property owner's appeal of the township's approval of a subdivision redevelopment without an environmental impact assessment. The relevant zoning procedures require only a developer submit a request for such an assessment, not that one be completed. The assessment company failed to complete the assessment as it was developing new procedures, and because the zoning laws allow the zoning commission to act without a submitted assessment, it was not improper to approve the redevelopment project. Reversed in part.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Moll, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: AC46146, Categories: environment, Property, Zoning
J. Moeller finds that the district court properly held that a Department of Water Resources enforcement action was not barred by a two-year limitations period. The period began to run when the department's director became aware that a landowner had not completed the streambank restoration required by a consent order. The landowner was involved in ongoing negotiations with the department over his compliance, so the director would have first known he did not plan to comply when he sought declaratory relief. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Moeller, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 50273, Categories: environment, Water
J. Moss denies the state of Florida's motion seeking a stay of an injunction entered in a suit brought under the Endangered Species Act pending appeal. Staying the decision would, in effect, deny the environmental groups the preliminary injunctive relief they sought, so the public interest and risk of injury to those groups weigh against a stay. Florida, meanwhile, has not demonstrated that it is likely to suffer an irreparable injury absent a stay, nor that it is likely to prevail on appeal.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Moss, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv119, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: Civil Procedure, environment
J. Bennett affirmed in part and vacated in part a district court preliminary injunction limiting wolf trapping and snaring in certain parts of Montana to January 1, 2024 through February 15, 2024. Environmental groups alleged that Montana’s laws authorizing recreational wolf and coyote trapping and snaring, including regulations approved by the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission, allowed the unlawful “take” of grizzly bears, a threatened species. The district court was correct in considering new arguments and new materials, submitted with the organizations' reply brief in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction, because the record showed that the State of Montana had an opportunity to respond to those submissions. However, the injunction was overbroad because it prevents Montana from trapping and snaring wolves for research purposes. Affirmed in part.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Bennett, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: 23-3754, Categories: environment
J. DeMarchi finds in partial favor of environmentalists after they sued the federal government for not properly putting into place a plan that can rebuild the Pacific sardine population, which was declared overfished in 2019. The government prevails on a few minor claims regarding what environmental impact statements are needed to resolve the matter, but environmentalists have shown the feds did not put in place a plan that will prevent overfishing or rebuild the sardine population by the deadline set under the Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: DeMarchi, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 5:21cv5407, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment
J. Aiken denies the government's motion to stay proceedings while its writ of mandamus is pending in the 9th Circuit. The young activists claim that the government knowingly destabilized the Oregon population's climate system by approving of the Jordan Cove Liquified Natural Gas Terminal in Coos Bay, which became the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions in Oregon. The government and others repeatedly delayed the case from entering the evidentiary phase for almost 10 years, and they do not identify any new issues that would justify a further stay or convince this court that the 9th Circuit is likely to grant the petition for mandamus.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Aiken, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 6:15cv1517, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, environment, Government
J. Eddins finds that proceedings initiated by a state agency are not sheltered by sovereign immunity, and grants attorney fees to groups defending a frivolous petition filed by the state them. The court deems frivolous the board’s petition, which claims that an environmental group winning a prior case that capped water diversions from a Maui river prevented water from being used to battle the Lahaina wildfires. “It seems that the BLNR tried to leverage the most horrific event in state history to advance its interests.” Despite many sources, including Maui county itself, establishing that water availability from the river had nothing to do with containing the fires, the board refused to withdraw its petition and forced the environmental group to participate in further proceedings. Sovereign immunity is waived when state agencies initiate original actions, therefore the board is subject to the environmental group’s attorney fees.
Court: Hawai'i Supreme Court, Judge: Eddins, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: SCPW-23-471, Categories: environment, Government, Attorney Fees
[Consolidated.] J. Herndon finds the district court properly determined a per se regulatory taking occurred, awarding $48 million to the landowner. The city adopted a plan reclassifying ranch land as allowing for "residential densities," along with a golf course. The owner's efforts to develop the property were rendered futile by the city's actions, supporting that the regulatory taking occurred. The court properly relied on the owner's expert's valuation to determine just compensation, and the city did not challenge the valuation or provide an alternative. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Herndon , Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 84345, Categories: Administrative Law, environment, Property
J. Agee finds the lower court improperly interpreted the plain text of the decree. Environmental protection groups sued a now-defunct coal corporation for violating the Clean Water Act. They negotiated a consent decree that significantly limited the corporations' surface mining operations in Central Appalachia and required the company to reclaim its mining sites—that is, to return the mined land to a usable state. The new owner attempted to allow third parties to surface mine at the original corporation's facility to raise funds after inheriting the bankrupt coal corporation. The lower court found this violated the decree, but the decree only applies to the original corporation and does not bar others from using the land as they please. Vacated.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Agee, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 23-1696, Categories: Energy, environment, Contract
J. Berzon denies a petition for panel rehearing and amends an opinion filed on July 3, 2023, now affirming the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the U.S. Forest Service in an action brought by an environmental group alleging that the Service’s approval of the Walton Lake Restoration Project violated the National Environmental Policy Act. The Forest Service developed the Project to replace trees infested with laminated root rot and bark beetles with disease-resistant trees. The judgment of the district court is affirmed and the previous stay of its order dissolving the preliminary injunction is lifted. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Berzon, Filed On: April 16, 2024, Case #: 22-35857, Categories: environment
J. Tallman affirmed a matter in part from a combined jury and bench trial against a munitions and explosives company in an action brought by the Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency (SCVWA) that alleged that the company was responsible for contamination of groundwater that the agency pumps from wells. The district court properly permitted SCVWA to assert restoration costs as a measure of damages for the first time after the close of discovery, SCVWA adequately established that groundwater treatment facilities were an appropriate measure of damages, and the jury award of restoration costs was reasonable. However, the district court improperly denied a finding to SCVWA a liability against the company for one category of incurred response costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Affirmed in part.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Tallman, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 22-55727, Categories: environment, Water
J. Sacks finds that a board of health’s order to the owner of an asphalt plant to cease and desist its operation is valid and reverses a judgment nulling the order. While the prior judge determined that the order was arbitrary and capricious because the board failed to provide evidence that the odor produced by the plant is injurious to the public health, the board has the authority to treat the plant as a public nuisance after residents in proximity to the plant complained of the intense odor, dizziness and eyes burning and watering. Reversed.
Court: Massachusetts Court Of Appeals, Judge: Sacks, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 23-P-629, Categories: environment, Municipal Law, Zoning
J. Hiraoka finds an environmental court properly determined that the conservation group was not entitled to a contested case hearing over the renewal of permits to divert water from a Maui river. The group did not have a constitutionally protected property interest in the permits based on rights to a clean and healthful environment. The permits do comply with environmental regulations and governmental interest in the providing water to its communities overweighs the need for a contested case hearing. However, when the permits were continued, the environmental court should not have modified the conditions to limit stream diversions as the board should have authority over modifications. Affirmed.
Court: Hawai'i Court Of Appeals, Judge: Hiraoka, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: CAAP-22-516, Categories: environment, Government, Water
J. Moss denies the state of Florida's motion for a stay of a prior order granting partial summary judgment to environmental groups in a suit alleging that federal regulators improperly delegated permitting authority to Florida regulators, and denies its motion for final judgment while granting its alternative request for relief in the form of partial final judgment. A limited stay in this case “is neither workable nor desirable,” and would require the Court to develop a program splitting work between different agencies over those agencies’ objections and result in needless redundancy. The final judgment motion is denied because one count, regarding the Army Corps of Engineers’ retained waters list, has remaining controversies to resolve. This count, however, is substantially distinct from the other counts in its legal theory and the administrative record it involves, so final, appealable judgment is entered as to the other counts.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Moss, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv119, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, environment
J. Reiber finds that the environmental court improperly denied the town’s request for reconsideration in this interlocutory appeal. The town argues the tolling provisions do not apply in municipal panel appeals and the request was not filed with the court making it not formal. The appeals court is unpersuaded tolling under judicial economy is required. Accordingly, the claims are remanded for lack of jurisdiction and the environmental court was untimely. Reversed.
Court: Vermont Supreme Court, Judge: Reiber, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 23-AP-247, Categories: environment, Government, Jurisdiction
J. Sessions denies Monsanto, Bayer and two other companies’ motion to dismiss a misrepresentation claim brought by four teachers and a student, who say the companies’ polychlorinated biphenyls are contaminating school buildings, as well as a husband’s claim for loss of consortium due to his wife’s injuries. The ag giants are not entitled to dismissal because the plaintiffs plausibly alleged justifiable reliance on the companies’ representations.
Court: USDC Vermont, Judge: Sessions, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv272, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: environment, Tort, Negligence
J. Stephens finds that the lower court properly found that the Benton County Water Conservancy Board does not have the standing to challenge a policy from the state Department of Ecology that governs the division of water rights. The board has not been able to show that it suffered any injury after the department refused to accept proposed division forms under the policy, and its interests would not be redressed if the challenged policy were tossed. The board lacks all standing to challenge it as a result. Affirmed.
Court: Washington Supreme Court, Judge: Stephens, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 101838-0, Categories: environment, Water
J. Harrison finds the circuit court improperly dismissed the hunting lease caretaking service's complaint seeking nearly $8,000 in payment for an unpaid invoice. The caretaker terminated a verbal contract with a hunter after performing extra services that were added to the ongoing invoice, asking for payment in full. The circuit court entered an order finding that, in the absence of a written contract, the statute of limitations applies. Though the hunter offers several definitions for the agreement, which would govern the accrual date, this determination, as well as the question of timeliness, is for a jury to decide. Reversed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harrison , Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: CV-22-528, Categories: Debt Collection, environment, Contract
J. Kobayashi remands to state court a case brought by families against their landlords that evicted them from their homes after their water was contaminated by the U.S. Navy’s jet fuel leak. Despite the landlord’s relationship with the military under residential agreements, the landlords themselves are not military and therefore do not fall under federal jurisdiction. Bringing in the U.S. as a third-party defendant does not grant jurisdiction because “a defendant may not create subject-matter jurisdiction by filing a third-party complaint — that is not a voluntary act by plaintiff.”
Court: USDC Hawaii, Judge: Kobayashi, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv588, NOS: Torts to Land - Real Property, Categories: environment, Government, Landlord Tenant