Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

United States v. Deaton

The court holds that developers' sidecasting of dredged spoil in a jurisdictional wetland constitutes the discharge of a pollutant under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The court first holds that the deposit of dredged or excavated material from a wetland back into the same wetland constitutes the discha...

Green Ridge, City of v. Kreisel

The court holds that a trial court incorrectly concluded that a city ordinance regulating junkyards was a zoning ordinance subject to notice-and-hearing requirements. A junkyard owner who had been cited for several violations of the ordinance claimed that the ordinance was inapplicable because it wa...

Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

The court holds that a railroad's motion to dismiss a power company's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) cost recovery action against it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be denied. The court first holds that the power company's allegation as co...

Huish Detergents, Inc. v. Warren County, Ky.

The court holds that a lower court improperly dismissed a laundry detergent manufacturer's claim that an exclusive franchise agreement between a county and a solid waste handler violated the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The agreement gave the waste handler the exclusive right to collect and process...

Leland v. Moran

The court grants in part and denies in part a New York municipal village's motion to dismiss property owners' negligence and Fourteenth Amendment due process claims against the village for failure to address an unlicensed solid waste management facility's violations of the municipal zoning code. The...

L.C. Dev. Co. v. Lincoln County

The court holds that a county in Missouri can regulate the location of solid waste facilities. A development company challenged a county regulation that prohibits the location of a sanitary landfill within one-quarter mile of any occupied dwelling. A trial court denied the company's motion for summa...

Adams Outdoor Adver. v. E. Lansing, City of

The court holds that a municipal regulation prohibiting billboards on rooftops did not effect a taking of an outdoor advertiser's interest in its rooftop signs. The regulation, enacted in 1975, prohibited rooftop billboards after 1987. The advertiser renewed its leases for rooftop billboards with se...

Shawnee Trail Conservancy v. Department of Agric.

The court upholds a district court dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of recreational groups' claims that the U.S. Forest Service violated the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when it designated certain areas of the Shawnee National Forest as Research Natur...

Federal Oversight Vs. State Discretion: EPA's Authority to Reject State Permitting Authorities' BACT Determinations Under the CAA's Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program: <i>Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation v. EPA</i>

In Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowly upheld orders issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to §§113(a)(5) and 167 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), prohibiting construction of a new power generator unit at a mine in Northwest Alaska.

<i>Kelo</i>'s Legacy

Editors' Summary: Rather than signaling the death of private property rights, as media and the public initially feared, the Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London ushered in an era of increased state and federal protection for private property. In this Article, Daniel H. Cole examines Kelo's repercussions for urban redevelopment. He begins with a description of the case, and then examines the resulting backlash from the media and public opinion, which decried the decision as unduly expanding eminent domain powers.