State of Alaska v. Department of Agriculture

<> State of Alaska v. Department of Agriculture - 11/7/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 13-5147, Consolidated with 13-5150, 13-5151. Regarding the Roadless Rule which  prohibited road construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting on millions of acres of national forest lands, including vast swaths of national forest land in Alaska. The Panel ruled: "This case has an unusual procedural background, and our holding is accordingly narrow. We reverse the judgment of the District Court dismissing Alaska's complaint as untimely, and we remand to the District Court for consideration of Alaska's challenges to the Roadless Rule."

In Re: Deepwater Horizon

<> In Re: Deepwater Horizon - 11/5/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, Case No. 12-30883. B.P. Exploration & Production, Inc. (BP) and Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (Anadarko) filed petitions for en banc rehearing affirming the lower court's grant of partial summary judgment. The full Panel considered the arguments and said "Appellants' arguments fail to persuade us that we erred or need to alter our decision to affirm the district court's grant of partial summary judgment."

American Whitewater v. Tidwell

<> American Whitewater v. Tidwell - 11/5/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Case No. 13-1960, 13-2016, & 13-2017. The case involves a 57 miles stretch of the Chattooga River, 432 acres of adjacent land designated under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA). American Whitewater, Plaintiff-Appellant, and others argue that the Forest Service should not allow "floating" on some or all portions of the river under the WSRA. The district court rejected the challenges and the Panel agreed with the district court's well-reasoned opinion and affirmed.

NRDC v. USDOT

NRDC v. USDOT - 10/30/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 12-56467. The Panel affirmed the district court's summary judgment in favor of federal and state defendants in an action brought by environmental groups alleging that the defendants violated the Clean Air Act and the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to properly evaluate and disclose the potential environmental impact of a planned expressway connecting the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to the I-405 freeway.

National Oilseed Processors Assoc. v. OSHA

National Oilseed Processors Assoc. v. OSHA - 10/24/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 12-1228. Petitioners (and intervenor for petitioners), whose members include numerous businesses that handle and process grain and other agricultural products, seek vacatur of the Final Rule as it applies to combustible dust. The Panel denied the petition for review.

Appeals Court Decision On Csapr A Major Victory For Health Of Children, Elderly And Asthma Sufferers

Appeals Court Decision On Csapr A Major Victory For Health Of Children, Elderly And Asthma Sufferers – 10/23/14. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit lifted its hold on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which will protect Americans from dangerous air pollution that crosses state lines from coal-fired power plants.

Headwaters Resources v. Illinois Union Insurance Co.

Headwaters Resources v. Illinois Union Insurance Co. - 10/20/14. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, Case No. 13-4035. Under several applicable policies, Headwaters sought reimbursement for its litigation costs arising from a case brought by landowners in Virginia, alleging that fly ash used in the construction of a golf course caused air and water pollution that devalued their homes and created health risks. The Panel ruled that each of the pollution exclusions is unambiguous, and affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the insurance companies.