Cook v. Rockwell International

<> Cook v. Rockwell International - 6/23/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, Case No. 14-1112.  As summarized by Law360, "The Tenth Circuit ordered a Colorado district court to deliver landowners a ruling on their state nuisance theory after their 25-year plutonium contamination class action against Dow Chemical Co. and the former Rockwell International Corp. failed on federal grounds."      The Appeals Court ruled in part, "This long lingering litigation deserves to find resolution soon. The judgment of the district court is vacated and the case is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion." Cook v. Rockwell International Corp. - Petition for certiorari denied on June 25, 2012

Association of Irritated Residents (AIR) v. US EPA

<> Association of Irritated Residents (AIR) v. US EPA - 6/23/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 13-73398. The panel denied a petition for review brought by the Association of Irritated Residents seeking review of EPA's promulgation of 40 C.F.R. § 52.245 under § 110(k)(6) of the Clean Air Act, an error-correcting provision, after the EPA determined that it had mistakenly approved certain New Source Review rules in 2004 as part of California's State Implementation Plan.

WildEarth Guardians v. US Forest Service

<> WildEarth Guardians v. US Forest Service – 6/22/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 12-35434. The panel affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings the district court's judgment in an action challenging the United States Forest Service's decision to designate over two million acres of public land in the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest for use by winter motorized vehicles.

Aransas Project v. Bryan Shaw

<> Aransas Project v. Bryan Shaw - 6/22/15. In the U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No. 14-1138. Petition denied. The case from the Fifth Circuit involves the deaths of 23 endangered whooping cranes. The Aransas Project sued directors of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality under the Endangered Species Act. TAP sought and was granted an injunction prohibiting TCEQ from issuing new permits to withdraw water from rivers that feed the estuary where the cranes make their winter home. The injunction was reversed by the Appeals Court and will now stand. Access the Fifth Court decisions

Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. US Forest Service

<> Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. US Forest Service - 6/17/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 13-35624. The panel affirmed the district court's holding that the United States Forest Service violated Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act when it failed to reinitiate consultation after the United States Fish and Wildlife Service designated critical habitat for the Canada lynx on National Forest land; affirmed the district court's denial of injunctive relief to Cottonwood Environmental Law Center; and remanded to provide Cottonwood an opportunity to make an evidentiary showing that specific projects would likely cause irreparable damage to its members' interests.

South Carolina Coastal League v. US Army Corps of Engineers

<> South Carolina Coastal League v. US Army Corps of Engineers - 6/17/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Case No. 14-1796. The League brought the present action against various parties under federal law to stop what it fears will be significant degradation to 485 acres of freshwater wetlands and its conversion to saltwater wetlands.      The Appeals Court affirmed the district court's order dismissing this action as moot and affirmed the district court's denial of the League's motion seeking leave to amend its First Amended Complaint.

Aera Energy LLC v. FERC

<> Aera Energy LLC v. FERC – 6/16/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 13-1138 & 13-1303. Petitioners Aera Energy LLC and several other natural gas and transportation companies seek review of different aspects of seven orders issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission during rate proceedings.       The Appeals Court concludes that the Commission complied with the Natural Gas Act and court precedents and responded meaningfully to petitioners' objections and articulated a rational explanation for its decisions -- the petitions are denied.