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

Waste Industries USA, Inc. v. State

A North Carolina appellate court held that a state statute that places limitations on the size and location of solid waste landfills does not violate the Commerce Clause by discriminating against out-of-state waste. It is undisputed that the statute, N.C. Gen. Stat. §130A-295.6 (2011), does not fac...

Gregory Village Partners, L.P. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.

A district court held that a property owner may go forward with its RCRA claims against neighboring property owners for groundwater and soil contamination, but it dismissed the owner's CERCLA claim against a water district that operated a sewer line between the two properties. The owner adequate...

Indiana Farm Bureau Insurance Co. v. Harleysville Insurance Co.

An Indiana appellate court reversed and remanded a lower court decision that an insurer need not defend and indemnify a service station owner in underlying state administrative proceedings concerning the environmental remediation of the site. The insurer argued that because the loss occurred pri...

No Wetlands Landfill Expansion v. County of Marin

A California appellate court reversed a lower court decision directing a county board to hear an administrative appeal of an environmental impact report (EIR) and permit for a landfill expansion project. A local environmental enforcement agency issued the permit after considering and certifying ...

Applewood Properties, LLC v. New South Properties, LLC

A North Carolina appellate court held that the state's Sedimentation Pollution Control Act (SPCA) does not apply if there was no deposition of sediment to water. The owner of a golf course claimed that a construction company was liable under the SPCA for damages stemming from land-disturbing act...

American Alternative Insurance Co. v. Moon Nurseries, Inc.

A district court dismissed an insurance company's CERCLA claim against a tree nursery to recover response costs incurred by firefighters responding to a fire. The fire involved chlorine, a hazardous substance, and the company asserted that its insureds--two fire companies—"removed" and "remediated...