Among certain academic circles, it has become common to assert that owners of private land take care of what they own. One encounters the claim most often in discussions about land-related environmental problems. Unowned lands, resources shared by many: these are the ones that are degraded, it is said, not lands that have a single owner vested with clear, secure rights. Private owners take care of what they own.
In a recent article in the Yale Law Journal, Profs. Thomas W. Merrill and Henry E. Smith express concerns about what they take to be the excessive abstraction of law-and-economics writing on private property. This scholarly discourse, they tell us, seems to have forgotten that property law has to do with things. It has become too focused on property as a bundle of legal entitlements and liabilities, overlooking the underlying res that a person might actually own.
Any analysis of U.S. progress toward meeting the goals of Agenda 21 must include a hard look at the political will and actions toward reforming our system of land use controls. Land development policies and decisions are inextricably intertwined with a significant number of items contained in Agenda 21, creating a perhaps unusual scenario requiring cross-disciplinary and interjurisdictional approaches to effectively implement strategies that will both promote and yield sustainable land development.
The court rules that the final environmental impact report that resulted in issuance of a conditional use permit for the construction and operation of a hazardous waste incinerator at the Kettleman Hills site in Kings County, California, was inadequate as an informational document under the Californ...
The court holds that a tank truck company is not entitled to summary judgment on claims against its insurers for indemnification of costs resulting from a government action against it under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) with respect to soil and gr...
Applying Michigan law to an insurance dispute, the court adopts the doctrines of known-risk and loss-in-progress, and denies coverage because the insured's environmental director knew or reasonably should have known of a substantial probability of a loss caused by groundwater contamination at the si...
The Tenth Circuit affirmed a district court decision that Utah's statutes regulating the storage and transportation of spent nuclear fuel are preempted by federal law. Contrary to the state's arguments, the plaintiffs who challenge the statutes—a consortium of utility companies and a Native Americ...
The court holds that the presence of hazardous waste on industrial property that a company sold to an individual does not breach any express or implied warranties. The court first finds that the purchase and sale agreement contains no express warranties as to the condition of the property, and a rid...
The court holds that the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) bars an insurer's claim that U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials acted tortiously in ordering the insurer to clean up a site under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, ...
The court refuses to preliminarily enjoin the U.S. Department of the Army from beginning incineration tests of chemical warfare agents at its disposal facility in Tooele, Utah. The court first holds that the asserted risks of harm due to dioxin exposure and accidental agent releases are too speculat...