The court holds that a local ordinance imposing geographic restrictions on the sources of waste for a regional medical waste incinerator does not violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. A commercial enterprise obtained authorization to construct a medical waste incinerator, and after c...

The court holds that a computer circuit manufacturer is entitled to reimbursement under its comprehensive general liability insurance policy of expenses incurred pursuant to a government consent decree requiring it to clean up toxic waste contamination at a former manufacturing facility. The court f...

The court holds that two insurance companies have no duty to defend or indemnify a company that served as the intermediary for the disposal of dioxin-contaminated waste against personal injury and property damage claims allegedly arising from contamination at Missouri sites where the waste was spray...

The court holds en banc that the arbitrary and capricious standard of review applies to agency decisions not to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act. The court overrules its prior decisions holding that a reasonableness standard of review should...

The court holds that the district court, in applying the rule of reason, did not abuse its discretion in dissolving an injunction when it held that the environmental impact statements (EISs) produced by the National Park Service (NPS), concerning the impact of any possible future mining activity in ...

The court, in a sequel case to Seattle Audubon Society v. Evans, 22 ELR 20372, enjoins the U.S. Forest Service from making additional timber sales in U.S. Forest Service Regions Five and Six that would log suitable habitat for the northern spotted owl until revised standards and guidelines complying...

The court holds that a letter from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency notifying a potentially responsible party (PRP) that it may be liable for cleanup costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is not a "suit" triggering an insurer's duty to...

The court holds that the owner of a Minnesota site contaminated with hazardous substances has stated a cause of action, under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA), and common law, against a dissolved corpora...

The court holds that a lawsuit by individuals against a chemical company for damages based on injuries resulting from exposure to thorium-containing fill material was properly removed to federal court, because the chemical company brought a third-party complaint against officials of the U.S. Environ...

The court holds that state and federal agencies involved in a proposed port project in Searsport, Maine, reasonably decided to restrict the analysis in an environmental impact statement (EIS) of secondary impacts from the project to four light-dry industries. The court also holds that the district c...