Belle Company, L.L.C., et al v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - 7/30/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Firth Circuit, Case No. 13-30262. Plaintiff owns property and Plaintiff-Appellant Kent Recycling, L.L.C. has an option to purchase the property in the event that it can be used as a solid-waste landfill. In February 2012, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a jurisdictional determination ("JD") stating that the property contains wetlands that are subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act. Belle and Kent sued, alleging that the JD is unlawful and should be set aside. The district court dismissed the suit for lack of subject matter urisdiction, concluding that the JD is not "final agency action" and therefore is not reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Panel affirmed.
Monday, August 4, 2014
Vaughn Leroy Meyer v. JinkoSolar Holding Co.
Vaughn Leroy Meyer v. JinkoSolar Holding Co. - 7/31/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, Case No. 13-616. The Panel dismissed a complaint alleging violations of the federal securities laws and vacated the dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the failure to disclose ongoing serious pollution problems rendered misleading statements describing measures taken to comply with Chinese environmental regulations.
State of Arizona v. Raytheon Co.
State of Arizona v. Raytheon Co. - 8/1/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 12-15691. In a mixed, split decision, the panel affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's order approving consent decrees in an action under CERCLA. In part the Panel reaffirm that a district court has an "obligation to independently scrutinize the terms of [such agreements]," by, inter alia, comparing "the proportion of total projected costs to be paid by the [settling parties] with the proportion of liability attributable to them."
People of the State of California v. US Department of the Interior
People of the State of California v. US Department of the Interior - 8/1/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 12-55856, 12-55956. The panel amended its opinion and affirmed the district court's summary judgment in favor of federal defendants and intervenor water districts re: an EIS prepared by the Secretary of the Interior on the effects of water transfer agreements on the Salton Sea in southern California. The petition for rehearing was denied and the petition for rehearing en banc was rejected.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
