The American Coal Company v. MSHR

<> The American Coal Company v. MSHR - 7/31/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 14-1206. Mine Safety and Health Administration observed patches of smoldering, smoking coal without visible flames and issued a citation. American Coal argues that the citation and fine should be vacated because a "fire," for purposes of the Mine Act, exists only when there are visible flames.      The Panel ruled: " The statutory term 'fire' is ambiguous, the Secretary of Labor reasonably determined that the term does not require the presence of flames, and substantial evidence supports the conclusion that the smoldering patches on American Coal's stockpile satisfied the Secretary's interpretation of a 'fire.'"

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

<> Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp. - 7/30/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Case No. 14-4078. In this unpublished suit between responsible parties involving the Airdock, a massive facility built in Akron, Ohio in 1929 to manufacture and house blimps.       In conclusion, we hold that Lockheed's claim in the Airdock Litigation arose from preclosing operations of the Airdock and thus falls outside Lockheed's indemnification obligations under § 6.19.2 of the Asset Purchase Agreement. We therefore affirm the district court's judgment.

City and County of San Francisco v. U.S. DOT

<> City and County of San Francisco v. U.S. DOT - 7/30/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 13-15855. The panel affirmed the district court's dismissal of an action brought by the City and County of San Francisco against the Secretary of Transportation and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (the "Agency"), alleging claims under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968 and the Administrative Procedure Act, arising after a natural gas transmission pipeline exploded in San Bruno, California, causing multiple deaths and injuries and widespread damage to property.

Rogers Cartage Company v. Monsanto Company

 

<> Rogers Cartage Company v. Monsanto Company - 7/27/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, Case Nos. 12-3624 & 13-3052. The government sued several potentially responsible parties (PRPs) regarding a cleanup near East St. Louis and many of those PRPs brought contribution claims against one another.      One PRP, Rogers Cartage Company, settled with the other PRPs, but later it sought contribution from them again via a third-party complaint in a separate action. After that third-party complaint was severed and transferred back to the EPA action, the district court dismissed it and imposed sanctions against Rogers Cartage based on the settlement agreement. Rogers Cartage appeals those decisions, and the Appeals Court affirmed.

Organized Village of Kake v. USDA

<> Organized Village of Kake v. USDA - 7/29/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 11-35517. The en banc [full] court affirmed the district court's summary judgment in favor of the Organized Village of Kake, finding that the United States Department of Agriculture's promulgation of the Tongass National Forest Exemption to the Department's "Roadless Rule" (limiting road construction and timber harvesting in national forests) violated the Administrative Procedure Act; vacated the Tongass Exemption; and reinstated application of the Roadless Rule to the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. The U.S. Department of Agriculture declined to appeal, but intervenor-defendant State of Alaska appealed. Ninth Circuit Ensures Protection of Roadless Areas in Alaska's Tongass National Forest

EME Homer City Generation, L.P v. EPA

<> EME Homer City Generation, L.P v. EPA – 7/28/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 11-1302. Consolidated with dozens of other cases. This major case involves the Clean Air Act regulations and the issue regulation of emissions in upwind States that may affect air quality in downwind States – the so called, "good neighbor provision." Petitioners challenge that EPA has overregulated emissions budgets.      The Panel said: "To sum up: We hold invalid the 2014 SO2 emissions budgets for Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas, as well as the 2014 ozone-season NOX budgets for Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. We remand without vacatur to EPA for it to reconsider those emissions budgets. We reject all of petitioners' other challenges to the Transport Rule, including all of their facial challenges to the Rule. The petitions for review are therefore granted in part and denied in part." Appeals Court Keeps the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule in Place, Directs EPA to Conduct Additional Analyses

Chinatown Neighborhood Association v. Harris

<> Chinatown Neighborhood Association v. Harris - 7/27/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 14-15781. The panel affirmed the district court's dismissal of plaintiffs' amended complaint challenging California's "Shark Fin Law," which makes it "unlawful for any person to possess, sell, offer for sale, trade, or distribute a shark fin" in the state.