77 results for 'cat:"Environment" AND cat:"Water"'.
J. Lee finds that the district court improperly entered summary judgment for the government including the Fish and Wildlife Service on an easement and remanded with instructions for the Service and the U.S. Army to reevaluate its water-savings analysis in a new biological opinion. The action was brought by environmental organizations challenging a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biological opinion concerning the use of water from the San Pedro River Basin in Arizona. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Lee, Filed On: December 4, 2023, Case #: 22-15809, Categories: environment, water
J. McGrath finds that the trial court rightly rejected an environmental quality department's approval of a permit to expand the operation of a coal strip mine. The Board of Environmental Review erred in finding that the operator had taken adequate steps to maintain the hydrological health of an adjacent creek. While pollutants would not significantly raise the creek's salinity, the Board failed to properly consider that the expanded operations would increase the duration that pollutants would be present. Also, the Board should have given more consideration to the cumulative impacts of expanded operations on the area's hydrology. Reversed in part.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: McGrath, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: DA 22-0064, Categories: environment, water
J. Smith finds that the district court properly held that a water and sewer district could not be liable on a direct-discharge theory because an underdrain pipe below the district’s holding ponds did not transfer pollutants between meaningfully distinct water bodies. However, the district court improperly dismissed a claim brought by an environmental law center for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The action was filed by the center, claiming an alleged discharge of treated wastewater into the West Fork of the Gallatin River without a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit. Affirmed in part.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Smith , Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 22-36015, Categories: environment, water
J. Sullivan finds for the Army Corps of Engineers on the state of Alabama’s challenge to the corps' updated master water control manual, which governs management of certain dams and reservoirs in the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa River Basin. The state fails to show the manual violates the Clean Water Act, the Administrative Procedure Act or the National Environmental Protection Act.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Sullivan, Filed On: November 9, 2023, Case #: 1:15cv696, NOS: Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision - Other Suits, Categories: Administrative Law, environment, water
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. Goldman finds the Water Quality Control Board properly imposed more than $6 million in penalties for the resort owner’s pollution of protected waterways during its construction of a residential resort. Separate petitions filed by the owner for administrative mandamus missed the filing deadline by three weeks. The state board’s declining to review the regional board’s decision is not subject to judicial review. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Goldman, Filed On: October 25, 2023, Case #: A165227, Categories: Construction, environment, water
J. Rickman finds that the trial court improperly upheld the administrative law judge's decision in favor of the agency in an action brought by the water works arising from a dispute over a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. The permit imposed new limits for fecal coliform bacteria and total residual chlorine in discharges into a river. Genuine issues of fact exist as to whether the water works' combined sewer overflows have a reasonable potential to cause an excursion above the applicable water quality standard. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Rickman, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: A23A0857, Categories: environment, water
J. Cassel finds the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources properly dismissed the resources district and a citizens group’s objections to the Platte to Republican Basin High Flow Diversion Project’s application seeking to divert surface water from an over-appropriated river. The groups’ allegations do not demonstrate that they have or will suffer an injury in fact, and so they fail to establish standing. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Cassel, Filed On: October 6, 2023, Case #: S-23-028, Categories: environment, water, Agency
J. Renner finds the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the California Department of Water Resources in this suit seeking civil penalties and injunctive relief for the department’s release of water from Lake Oroville down the dam’s spillways. A cited statute authorizes penalties against any person who has deposited harmful materials into California waters. There is no triable issue of fact, as the context of the water release was a declared emergency from flooding. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Renner, Filed On: October 5, 2023, Case #: C093600, Categories: environment, water, Injunction
J. Lie finds the trial court improperly granted the water district’s petition for a writ of mandate challenging the county’s approval of California-American Water Company’s application for a permit to construct the desalination plant and other facilities in an unincorporated part of Monterey County as part of its Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project. The county’s statement of overriding considerations justifying the project was supported by substantial evidence and any remaining deficiency in the statement as an informational document was not prejudicial. The water district does not dispute that the California Public Utilities Commission’s environmental impact report identified remedial mitigation measures, or that the county adopted them, and the water district has shown no basis for continuing concern with the project’s consistency with the policies. Reversed and remanded.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Lie, Filed On: October 4, 2023, Case #: H049146, Categories: Construction, environment, water
J. Goodwin grants in part the respective motions for summary judgment in the environmental groups’ suit against the mining company for its violation of Clean Water and the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation acts through the discharge of pollutants without a permit in Kanawha County. The court declares the company violated the acts by discharging pollutants without a permit from Nov. 26, 2021, to April 14 at Rush Creek Surface Mine No. 2, and failing to satisfy the reporting requirements of its permit at Rush Creek Surface Mine from November 2021 through November 2022. Since the company is currently in compliance with all of its permits, the groups' motion for injunctive relief to halt mining operations is denied, while a determination on the extent of the company's violations is held in abeyance.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Goodwin, Filed On: October 4, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv367, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: Energy, environment, water
J. Drozd refuses to dismiss Endangered Species Act claims filed by an irrigation company against the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, which the company says refuses to maintain its fish ladders and screens at a diversion dam, causing harm to salmon and steelhead, in retaliation for the company’s failure to sign-off on a proposed agreement. It has stated plausible claims for violations of due process and the Endangered Species Act.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Drozd, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv1961, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: environment, water, Due Process
J. Jarbou declines to dismiss class claims brought against the mayor and two other defendants after residents allegedly consumed water containing lead, bacteria, and other contaminants because claims were supported by repeated false statements defendants made to the public about the safety of the city’s water.
Court: USDC Western District of Michigan, Judge: Jarbou, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv960, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment, water, Negligence
J. Riggs finds that no occupying country or government, including Mexico, Spain, or the U.S., ever extinguished the aboriginal water rights of the Pueblo Indians because none of the countries took actions to intervene or reduce the tribe's use of the Jemez Valley River Basin.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Riggs, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 6:83cv1041, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: environment, Native Americans, water
J. Davila declines to dismiss an environmental group's lawsuit accusing Sunnyvale and Mountain View of unlawfully discharging pollution into their sewer systems. The cities moved for dismissal on the ground that a 2022 permit issued to them by the regional water quality board changed the landscape enough that the suit is moot. While the permit does change a few things, it does not rescind a prior 2015 permit or change the language of the local discharge rules. The new permit, as a result, does not moot the claims and allows the court to retain jurisdiction.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Davila, Filed On: September 14, 2023, Case #: 5:20cv824, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment, water, Jurisdiction
J. Clarke finds in favor of the federal government for its claim that the county government office's 1943 contract and 1977 water permit do not allow it to make unauthorized water diversions from Klamath River, and that the water diversion limits the available habitat of the shortnose sucker and other local endangered species. Although the 1943 contract allows the county government office to take a maximum of 27,500 acre-feet of water per year under normal circumstances, there is a valid and legal exception during times of drought, such as what happened in 2022, meaning the county government office violated the terms of the contract.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Clarke, Filed On: September 11, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv962, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: environment, water, Contract
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. 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. 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. 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. 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