The court holds that under Ohio law, the doctrine of res judicata bars property owners' Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) suit against the property's seller for leaving gasoline buried in the soil. The owners filed their RCRA suit in federal court after they litigated contract and fraud ...

The court holds that the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) bars a current property owner's claim for cleanup costs against the property's former owner. The current owner filed a claim for injunctive relief against the former owner, and then proceeded to clean up the property before relie...

The court holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) use of the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) to measure compliance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) treatment standard for spent potliner is arbitrary and capricious. Spent potliner is a byp...

The court dismisses strict liability, nuisance, trespass, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) claims filed against the former sublessee of contaminated property where an underground storage tank (UST) leaked. The former sublessee operated a gasoline station at the site, which was next ...

The court holds that various federal agencies violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in their preparations of biological assessments (BAs), biological opinions (BOs), and environmental impact statements (EIS) with respect to the survival of the Son...

A district court held that the FWS violated NEPA, but not the ESA, when it issued a special rule that specifies the protective mechanisms that apply to the polar bear as a result of its threatened status. In May 2008, the FWS listed the polar bear as threatened under the ESA. The Service then issued...

The Tenth Circuit, in a 120-page opinion, reversed a lower court decision setting aside and permanently enjoining the U.S. Forest Service's Roadless Area Conservation Rule. In setting aside the rule, the lower court held that the Service violated the Wilderness Act of 1964 and NEPA. But the Wilderne...

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...