The cases listed below appear in the most recent issue of ELR's Weekly Update. For cases previously reported, please use the filter on the left.
Volume , Issue
The court holds that all of an individual's claims for damages are based on a pesticide's label and are, therefore, preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
The court affirms a district court holding that where compensation was paid long after a taking, an individual was entitled to prejudgment interest, but remands the case for a redetermination of the amount of interest to be awarded.
The court holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not err when it refused to object to a county health district's issuance of a Clean Air Act (CAA) operating permit to a business.
You must be an ELI Member to access the full content.
You are not logged in. To access this content: