26 results for 'cat:"Environment" AND cat:"Jurisdiction"'.
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. Pearson denies, in part, the chemical and rail companies' motion to dismiss, ruling that when they leased railcars and used them to transport chemicals, they knew the cars would pass through Ohio, which is sufficient to establish jurisdiction in this court for claims filed by the New Palestine residents harmed by the train derailment.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Pearson, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv242, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: environment, Negligence, jurisdiction
J. Moritz grants a motion to transfer a dispute between the EPA and various groups and states over the EPA's decision to disapprove a series of state implementation plans for air quality. The petitioners in the case are asking to review a final rule on a national level, so their dispute is better handled the D.C. circuit.
Court: 10th Circuit, Judge: Moritz, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: 23-9514, Categories: environment, jurisdiction
Upon remand from the Supreme Court, J. Walker again upholds the district court's dismissal of landowners' challenge to the grant of a certificate to build 300 miles of pipeline from West Virginia to southern Virginia. The district court lacked jurisdiction, as the federal court of appeals had previously ruled on a petition challenging issuance of the certificate. Affirmed.
Court: DC Circuit, Judge: Walker, Filed On: February 13, 2024, Case #: 20-5203 , Categories: Energy, environment, jurisdiction
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. Rao upholds the district court's decision to remand the District of Columbia's case against several energy companies to superior court. The district, which accuses the companies of misrepresenting their products' effects on climate change, relied on D.C.'s consumer protection statute, rather than a federal cause of action. Affirmed.
Court: DC Court of Appeals, Judge: Rao, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: 22-7163, Categories: environment, Consumer Law, jurisdiction
J. Hart finds that while the county has a legally protected interest in oil and gas wells in its boundaries, the lower court properly dismissed its claims against the Department of Public Health. The increase in inspections to prevent leaks and reduce emissions does not constitute a concrete injury and, therefore, the county lacks standing to bring its claims. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Hart, Filed On: October 16, 2023, Case #: 2023CO54, Categories: Civil Procedure, environment, jurisdiction
J. Sullivan finds that the district court properly remanded Connecticut's Unfair Trade Practices Act complaint against Exxon Mobil to state court. Connecticut alleges that Exxon knowingly deceived consumers in the state about the negative environmental effects of its fossil fuels. The claims do not raise the federal common law of transboundary pollution as a necessary element for establishing Exxon's liability. Exxon was also not acting under a federal officer to invoke federal-officer removal jurisdiction.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Sullivan, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: 21-1446, Categories: environment, Trade, jurisdiction
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. Barbier denies as “vague” and “unpersuasive” challenges by a chemical plant to a 2010 government toxicology study that found its chloroprene emission rates posed an “imminent danger” to public health in communities surrounding the facility. Dismissing the plant’s claims in no way hinders its ability to defend itself or to argue that the government study is inaccurate or flawed. Dismissal of the plant’s claims on jurisdictional grounds does not constitute a judgment on the merits of the government’s suit against the facility.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Barbier, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv735, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment, Government, jurisdiction
J. Barbier denies DuPont’s motion to dismiss the federal government’s environmental lawsuit against it over a neoprene manufacturing facility on its property, leased to another firm. The government says the plant’s chloroprene emission rates pose an “imminent danger” to public health in communities surrounding it. DuPont unsuccessfully argued that the court lacked jurisdiction over “hypothetical allegations” that DuPont may interfere with the chemical plant’s compliance with orders to reduce pollution emissions at the facility. The court disagrees; the mere fact that DuPont is in a position to frustrate a potential court order is sufficient reason for the inclusion of DuPont as the landlord in the government’s environmental lawsuit and for the court to retain jurisdiction in the case.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Barbier, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv735, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment, Government, jurisdiction
J. McConnell finds that the trial court should have discharged a peremptory writ of mandate that ordered a city to set aside its approval of a project to put utility wires underground in several neighborhoods. The city complied with the writ and the remedial provisions of the Environmental Quality Act as required by the trial court, removing the trial court's jurisdiction. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: McConnell, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: D081185, Categories: environment, jurisdiction
[Consolidated.] J. Millett dismisses two petitions challenging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's approval of the construction of a natural gas compressor station in Weymouth, Massachusetts. The petitioners lack Article III standing in one petition, and the district court lacks statutory jurisdiction over the second petition.
Court: DC Circuit, Judge: Millett, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 22-1146, Categories: environment, jurisdiction
J. Chin finds that the district court properly remanded 19 actions contending plaintiffs suffered injuries due to residual toxicity from the Love Canal superfund site in Niagara Falls. The actions have bounced between federal and state jurisdictions, and following the latest amendment adding further affected sites, municipal and company defendants cited both federal officer and federal question jurisdiction. However, the claim seeking removal was untimely, and the "revival" exception was not applicable. Affirmed.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Chin, Filed On: July 14, 2023, Case #: 21-0249-cv, Categories: environment, Tort, jurisdiction
J. Edwards dismisses this appeal from a summary judgment entered in a dispute over the renewal of a mining permit. On appeal, the water works board contends that the permit at issue had expired before the mining company filed its renewal application. However, the board's "appeal to the trial court was taken from a nonfinal order," which deprived it of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appellate court also lacks jurisdiction to consider the appeal.
Court: Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, Judge: Edwards, Filed On: July 7, 2023, Case #: CL-2022-1059, Categories: Civil Procedure, environment, jurisdiction
J. Dillon grants the government's motion to dismiss federal tort claims arising from an allegedly negligent clean-up of
hazardous substances for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The property owners claim the government executed an unwarranted and fraudulent response action that damaged the property. Federal courts do not have jurisdiction over actions against the U.S. unless Congress has expressly waived the federal government’s sovereign immunity, which they haven't for this case.
Court: USDC Western District of Virginia, Judge: Dillon , Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: 5:22cv40, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment, Property, jurisdiction
J. Seabright dismisses claims of Environmental Species Act violations against several American Samoan telecommunication companies. Neither the American Samoa residents who brought the complaint nor the telecommunications companies have any significant ties to Hawaii and therefore lack jurisdiction to bring the complaint to the Hawaiian district court. Related motions for temporary restraining orders and for summary judgment are also denied.
Court: USDC Hawaii, Judge: Seabright, Filed On: June 16, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv377, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: environment, jurisdiction
J. Summerhays denies Shell USA’s request for reconsideration of an order remanding to state court a southwestern Louisiana coastal parish government’s suit alleging Shell’s oil and gas exploration activities violated state rules and permits. The ruling agrees with a decision in a similar suit in the Eastern District of Louisiana that the connection between a refining contract and production activities in the field is too attenuated to support removing the case to federal jurisdiction based on federal government requirements.
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Summerhays, Filed On: June 14, 2023, Case #: 2:18cv688, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Energy, environment, jurisdiction
J. Summerhays grants remand to the joint owners of a 35-acre tract in rural Church Point, Louisiana, transferring to state court their environmental property damage suit against Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO), Chevron-owned companies and Hess Corp. The corporations unsuccessfully argued for federal jurisdiction on grounds that ARCO, a Texas citizen, was improperly added to the suit by the property owners, a Louisiana woman and a Texas corporation based in Louisiana. The landowners prevailed by showing that the terms of a 1953 operating agreement “explicitly” provide that the sued companies, including ARCO, are proportionately liable for damages to related to their oil and gas operations. The landowners have stated “a viable claim against ARCO, even if they do not ultimately prevail.”
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Summerhays, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: 6:22cv6190, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: environment, Damages, jurisdiction
J. Urias remands to state court a lawsuit between representatives of a ranch and neighbors which the ranch alleges have failed to “properly maintain” oil and gas facilities, damaging the land. Those neighbors, the defendants in this case, were properly joined because they all conducted oil and gas operations nearby and were linked by a “common ‘series of occurrences,’” removing the “diversity jurisdiction” that would have allowed this court to hear this case.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Urias, Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv515, NOS: Torts to Land - Real Property, Categories: environment, Tort, jurisdiction
J. Joseph denies a request by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and dismisses, on jurisdictional grounds, a suit by two Louisiana investors in a venture seeking a mining permit for what may be “the largest gold discovery ever made” in Alaska’s northwest Seward Peninsula. Because the Corps has yet to rule on the investors’ appeal of an initial permit denial, these is “not yet a final decision” by the agency for judicial review, notwithstanding the investors’ argument that the Corps’ appeal process is an “injurious waste of time.” The ruling also notes that “the Corps’ apparent misunderstanding of its own regulations is concerning.”
Court: USDC Middle District of Louisiana, Judge: Joseph, Filed On: May 22, 2023, Case #: 6:23cv114, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: environment, Agency, jurisdiction