Case Law Index Environmental Law

January 1, 2002 – October 31, 2019

 

This index provides a comprehensive though not necessarily exhaustive compilation of reported and unreported federal and state court decisions involving Environmental Law that were decided on or after January 1, 2002. The cases are listed in reverse chronological order. The “Text” link goes to the freely available Google Scholar text of the opinion.  These listings are for educational purposes only, and are not a substitute for legal counsel.


 

SUPREME COURT

Nat. Ass’n of Mfrs. v. Dept. of Defense, 138 S.Ct. 617 (2018) (Challenges to EPA definition of WOTUS required to be brought in federal court) Text

Weyerhaeuser Co. v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 139 S. Ct. 361 (2018) (Land is eligible for designation as critical habitat under the ESA only if it is habitat for species.) Text

Michigan v. EPA, 135 S.Ct. 702 (2014) (EPA was required to consider cost when regulating power plants under the CAA) Text

Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 573 U.S. 302 (2014) (CAA did not require that stationary sources be subject to PSD permitting requirements on the sole basis of the potential to emit greenhouse gases) Text

EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, LP, 572 US 489 (2014) (EPA’s Transport Rule was a permissible construction of the CAA good neighbor provision) Text

Decker v. Northwest Envtl. Defense Ctr., 133 S.Ct. 1326 (2013) (Discharges of channeled stormwater runoff from logging roads do not require CWA permits) Text

LA Flood Ctrl. v. Nat. Resources Defense Council, 133 S.Ct. 710 (2013) (Flow of water out of concrete channel within river was not “discharge of a pollutant”) Text

American Elec. Power Co., Inc. v. Connecticut, 564 U.S. 410 (2011) (CAA displaces federal common law right to seek abatement of carbon dioxide emissions) Text

Burlington N. & Sante Fe Ry. Co. v. United States, — U.S. —, 129 S. Ct. 1870 (2009) (manufacturer not liable as an “arranger” under CERCLA)  Text

Summers v. Earth Island Inst., — U.S. —, 129 S. Ct. 1142 (2009) (standing to challenge federal public lands policy)  Text

Nat’l Ass’n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife, 127 S. Ct. 2518 (2007) (criteria for EPA to transfer permitting authority to state)  Text

Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006) (scope of the CWA to protect wetlands)  Text

Bates v. Dow Agrosciences, L.L.C., 544 U.S. 431 (2005) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Bourne ex rel. Bourne v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 543 U.S. 917 (2004) (cert denied re: fungicide as toxic tort)

S. Fla. Water Mgmt. Dist. v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, 541 U.S. 95 (2004) (scope of NPDES permit)  Text


 

FIRST CIRCUIT

Rhode Island v. Chevron Corp., 393 F.Supp.3d (D. R.I. 2019) (CAA did not entirely preempt state-law public nuisance claim) Text

U.S. v. R.M. Packer Co., Inc., 355 F.Supp.3d 66 (D. Mass. 2018) (Transportation company was liable for violating CAA) Text

Toxics Action Ctr., Inc. v. Casella Waste Sys., Inc., 347 F.Supp.3d 67 (D. Mass. 2018) (Landfill from which contaminants alleged flowed to wetlands was not a point source) Text

Conservation Law Found., Inc. v. Pruitt, 881 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2018) (EPA approval of TMDL did not trigger requirement to notify individual dischargers) Text

Emhart Indus., Inc. v. New England Container Co., Inc., 274 F.Supp.3d 30 (D. R.I. 2017) (Aspects of EPA’s remedy-selection process for superfund site were arbitrary and capricious under CERCLA) Text

Emhart Indus., Inc. v. New England Container Co., Inc., 130 F.Supp.3d 534 (D. R.I. 2015) (Imposition of joint and several liability was warranted under CERCLA) Text

Conservation Law Found., Inc., v. Plourde Sand and Gravel Co., Inc., No. 13-CV-214-SM, 2014 WL 5781457 (D. N.H. Nov. 6, 2014) (alleging that defendants had been making discharges without a valid NPDES permit in violation of CWA) Text

Friends of the Boundary, Mountains v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 24 F.Supp.3d 105 (D. Me. 2014) (Relationship between issuance of CWA permit and potential harm to migratory birds was too attenuated) Text

U.S. v. Conagra Grocery Products Co., LLC, 4 F.Supp.3d 243 (D. Me. 2014) (Property owner was a potentially responsible party under CERCLA) Text

Allen v. Nat’l Inst. of Health, 974 F.Supp.2d 18 (D. Mass. 2013) (EIS for bio-safety laboratories adequately analyzed risks at all potential locations) Text

Members of Beede Site Group v. Fed. Home Loan, Mortg. Corp., 968 F.Supp.2d 455 (D. N.H. 2013) (Waste engine oil transported from oil processing site did not fall into CERCLA’s petroleum exclusion) Text

Upper Blackstone Water Pollution Abatement Dist. v. U.S. EPA, 690 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 2012) (EPA properly issued discharge permit) Text

Scarborough Citizens Protecting Res. V. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 674 F.3d 97 (1st Cir. 2012) (State’s conveyance of easement over federally-funded trail not subject to NEPA) Text

U.S. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 670 F.3d 377 (1st Cir. 2012) (Company had sufficient intent to render it liable under CERCLA for arranging for disposal of hazardous substance) Text

Strahan v. Diodati, 755 F.Supp.2d 318 (D. Mass. 2010) (Officers of state agencies did not cause takings of federally protected whales.) Text

Ashland Inc. v. GAR Electroforming, No. 08-227ML, 2010 WL 2927374 (D. R.I. July 22, 2010) (groundwater remediation costs at hazardous waste disposal site)  Text

Animal Welfare Inst. v. Martin, No. CV-08-267-B-W, 2009 WL 3766937 (D. Me. Nov. 10. 2009) (incidental taking of endangered species)  Text

Sierra Club v. Wagner, 555 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2009) (approval of two forest management plans)  Text

Animal Welfare Inst. v. Martin, 588 F.Supp.2d 70 (D. Me. 2008) (incidental takings under ESA)  Text

Natural Res. Council of Me. v. Int’l Paper Co., 424 F.Supp.2d 235 (D. Me. 2006) (citizen suit standing, notice)   Text

U.S. Pub. Interest Research Group v. Atl. Salmon of Me., LLC., 339 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2003) (granting injunction to remedy past CWA violations)   Text

U.S. Pub. Interest Research Group v. Atl. Salmon of Me., LLC., 215 F.Supp.2d 239 (D. Me. 2002) (citizen suit against salmon farm)  Text

Brunault v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., No. Civ.A.00-30059-FHF, 2002 WL 32538419 (D.Mass. Sept. 24, 2002) (FIFRA preemption)

U.S. Public Interest Research Group c. Stolt Sea Farm, Inc., 2002 WL 240386 (D. Me. 2002) (CWA citizen suit against salmon farm)

U.S. Public Interest Research Group v. Heritage Salmon, Inc., 2002 WL 240440 (D. Me. 2002) (CWA citizen suit against salmon farm)


 

SECOND CIRCUIT

Crespo. V. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., 394 F.Supp.3d 260 (E.D. N.Y. 2019) (EPA review did not affect scope of FIFRA preemption of state regulation of pesticides) Text

Bourbia v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., 375 F.Supp.3d 454 (S.D. N.Y. 2019) (FIFRA did not preempt breach of express warranty claim) Text

Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Wheeler, 373 F.Supp.3d 443 (S.D. N.Y. 2019) (EPA’s duty to prepare proposed regulations after state’s revised water quality standards fail to meet CWA requirements is discretionary) Text

Cooling Water Intake Structure Coal. v. U.S. EPA, 905 F.3d 49 (2nd Cir. 2018) (EPA had authority to adopt case-by-case approach to cooling water intake structures) Text

Zbitnoff v. James, 708 Fed.Appx. 25 (2nd Cir. 2017) (EIS omitting discussion of cost-savings of action fully complied with NEPA)  Text

Bartlett v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., 260 F.Supp.3d 231 (N.D. N.Y. 2017) (Plaintiff’s state-law claims were preempted by CERCLA) Text

U.S. v. Yetim, 251 F.Supp.3d 461 (E.D. N.Y. 2017) (Evidentiary hearing prior to imposing penalty on gas station owners for RCRA violations was warranted) Text

American Bird Conservancy v. Harvey, 232 F.Supp.3d 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (Members of wildlife conservation group had standing in action asserting violation of the Endangered Species Act.) Text

City Club of New York v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 246 F.Supp.3d 860 (S.D. N.Y. 2017) (Corps’ issuance of permit violated CWA) Text

Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. EPA, 846 F.3d 492 (2nd Cir. 2017) (Rule excluding water transfers from NPDES permitting requirements was reasonable) Text

DMJ Assoc., LLC v. Capasso, 565 B.R. 27 (E.D. N.Y. 2016) (CERCLA third-party claims against bankrupt business were not discharged in business’s bankruptcy) Text

U.S. v. Tonawand Coke Corp., 636 Fed.Appx. 24 (2nd Cir. 2016) (Unpermitted storage of hazardous waste was continuing offense under RCRA) Text

New York v. Town of Clarkstown, 95 F.Supp.3d 660 (S.D. N.Y. 2015) (Corporations that resolved their CERCLA liability through consent decree were entitled to contribution to persons not party to consent decree) Text

Residents for Sane Trash Sol., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 31 F.Supp.3d 571 (S.D. N.Y. 2014) (Corps did not abuse its discretion in limit scope of NEPA review) Text

ASARCO LLC v. Goodwin, 756 F.3d 191 (2nd Cir. 2014) (State law governed whether contribution liability could be imposed under CERCLA) Text

Paskar v. City of New York, 3 F.Supp.3d 129 (S.D. N.Y. 2014) (Garbage transfer facility was not subject to RCRA) Text

APL Co. Pte. Ltd. V. Kemira Water Sol., Inc., 999 F.Supp.2d 590 (S.D. N.Y. 2014) (Costs incurred in cleanup and response operations were necessary under CERCLA) Text

In re MTBE Products Liability Litiagtion, 725 F.3d 65 (2nd Cir. 2013) (CAA Amendments did not preempt jury verdict) Text

New York v. Adamowicz, 932 F.Supp.2d 340 (E.D. N.Y. 2013) (State was not required to show that the costs it expended under CERCLA were “necessary”) Text

New York v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 896 F.Supp. 180 (E.D. N.Y. 2012) (NEPA challenge was not prudentially ripe for review) Text

New York v. Solvent Chemical Co., Inc., 871 F.Supp.2d 209 (W.D. N.Y. 2012) (Pesticide manufacturer allocated share of responsibility for costs under CERCLA) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council v. U.S. EPA, 658 F.3d 200 (2nd Cir. 2011) (EPA’s pesticide risk assessment was arbitrary and capricious) Text

Lewis v. FMC Corp., 786 F.Supp.2d 690 (W.D. N.Y. 2011) (Surrounding residents lacked standing to bring CWA claim against pesticide formulations facility operator) Text

New York v. West Side Corp., 790 F.Supp.2d 13 (E.D. N.Y. 2011) (Common law claims were not preempted by CERCLA) Text

Metropolitan Taxicab Bd. of Trade v. City of New York, 615 F.3d 152 (2nd Cir. 2010) (preemption of local regulation involving incentives for purchase of hybrid taxicabs)  Text

Humane Soc’y of United States v. HVFG, LLC, No. 06 CV 6829(HB), 2010 WL 1837785 (S.D.N.Y. May 06, 2010) (private party action for a violation of the Clean Water Act)  Text

Coon ex rel. Coon v. Willet Dairy, Ltd. P’ship, 536 F.3d 171 (2d Cir. 2008) (barring RCRA claims)  Text

Coon v. Willet Dairy, LP, Nos. 5:02-CV-1195 (FJS/GJD), 5:04-CV-917 (FJS/GJD), 2007 WL 2071746 (N.D.N.Y. 2007) (CWA and RCRA claims)  Text

Natural Res. Def. Council v. Johnson, 461 F.3d 164 (2d Cir. 2006) (EPA determination on pesticide residue)   Text

Fox v. Cheminova, Inc., 387 F.Supp. 2d 160 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (FIFRA scope and preemption)   Text

W. Harlem Envtl. Action v. EPA, 380 F.Supp. 2d 289 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (FIFRA and rodenticide)   Text

No Spray Coal. v. City of New York, No. 00 Civ. 5395(GBD), 2005 WL 1354041 (S.D.N.Y.) (CWA permit)   Text

Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A., 399 F.3d 486 (2d Cir. 2005) (challenge to CAFO Act)   Text

No Spray Coal. v. City of New York, 351 F.3d 602 (2d Cir. 2003) (CWA citizen suit)   Text

Plourde v. Gladstone, 69 F. App’x 485 (2nd Cir. 2003) (toxic tort)

Williams v. Dow Chem. Co., 255 F.Supp. 2d 219 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (FIFRA preemption; pesticide approval fraud)  Text

Fox v. Cheminova, Inc., 213 F.R.D. 113 (E.D.N.Y. 2003) (FIFRA class action)   “>

No Spray Coal. v. City of New York, No. 00 Civ.5395 JSM, 2002 WL 31682387 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) (CWA and FIFRA)

Altman v. Town of Amherst, 47 F. App’x 62 (2d Cir. 2002) (pesticide application under CWA)    “>

Plourde v. Gladstone, 190 F.Supp.2d 708 (D.Vt. 2002) (toxic tort)  Text


 

THIRD CIRCUIT

Dep’t of Nat. Res. & Envtl. Control v. Mountaire Farms of Delaware, Inc., 375 F.Supp.3d 522 (D. Del. 2019) (Individuals who reside near poultry processing plant could intervene as of right in CWA and RCRA action by state against plant) Text

Pennsylvania Dep’t of Envtl. Protection v. Trainer Custom Chemical, LLC, 906 F.3d 85 (3rd Cir. 2018) (Landowner liable for costs of cleanup under CERCLA) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. Sec’y Pennsylvania Dep’t of Envtl. Protection, 903 F.3d 65 (3rd Cir. 2018) (Decision to issue water quality certification under CWA was not arbitrary) Text

Twp. Of Bordentown, New Jersey v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 903 F.3d 234 (3rd Cir. 2018) (FERC’s consideration of cumulative impacts was not arbitrary and capricious under NEPA) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 869 F.3d 148 (3rd Cir. 2017) (Corps’ rejection of compression alternative to proposed pipeline was permitted under CWA) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. Soil Safe, Inc., 223 F.Supp.3d 231 (D. N.J. 2016) (No evidence that recycled soil contaminants were hazardous waste under RCRA) Text

Trinity Indus., Inc. v. Greelease Holding Co., 173 F.Supp.3d 108 (W.D. Pa. 2016) (Previous owner’s failure to participate in cleanup did not adjust responsibility under CERCLA) Text

Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. U.S. EPA, 803 F.3d 151 (3rd Cir. 2015) (EPA’s approval of Pennsylvania’s regional haze SIP was arbitrary under CAA) Text

Maiden Creek Assoc., L.P. v. U.S. Dep’t of Transp., 123 F.Supp.3d 638 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (Allegations of economic injury not enough to grant standing under NEPA) Text

Tri-Realty Co. v. Ursinus College, 124 F.Supp.3d 418 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (Bodies of water on property owner’s land were not navigable waters) Text

American Farm Bureau Fed’n v. U.S. EPA, 792 F.3d 281 (3rd Cir. 2015) (Term “total maximum daily loads” in CWA was ambiguous; term “total” subject to multiple meanings) Text

Citizens Coal Council v. Matt Canestrale Contracting, Inc., 51 F.Supp.3d 593 (W.D. Pa. 2014) (Coal wash was solid waste under RCRA) Text

Trinity Indus., Inc. v. Greenlease Holding Co., 35 F.Supp.3d 698 (W.D. Pa. 2014) (Former facility owner was entitled to contribution from previous owner for CERCLA cleanup costs) Text

Gucciardi v. Bonide Products, Inc., 28 F.Supp.3d 383 (E.D. Pa. 2014) (Pesticide consumers claims for injury were not preempted by FIFRA) Text

U.S. v. South Jersey Clothing Co., 976 F.Supp.2d 577 (D. N.J. 2013) (Landowners were entitled to relief from consent decree settling CERCLA claims) Text

American Farm Bureau Fed’n v. U.S. EPA, 984 F.Supp.2d 289 (M.D. Pa. 2013) (EPA’s definition of TMDL allocations for Chesapeake Bay did not exceed authority under CWA) Text

U.S. v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 727 F.3d 274 (3rd Cir. 2013) (Failure to comply with CAA PSD requirements is a one-time violation) Text

Trinity Indus., Inc. v. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co., 735 F.3d 131 (3rd Cir. 2013) (Owner of industrial site could seek contribution under CERCLA from former site owner) Text

Bell v. Cheswick Generation Station, 734 F.3d 188 (3rd Cir. 2013) (Determining scope of CAA preemption) Text

Litgo New Jersey Inc. v. Comm’r New Jersey Dep’t of Envtl. Protection, 725 F.3d 369 (3rd Cir. 2013) (Court did not abuse its discretion under CERCLA) Text

GenOn Rema, LLC v. U.S. EPA, 722 F.3d 513 (3rd Cir. 2013) (EPA rule was not arbitrary, capricious, or abusive of EPA’s discretion under CAA) Text

Bell v. Cheswick Generation Station, 903 F.Supp.2d 314 (W.D. Pa. 2012) (State law claims were preempted by CAA) Text

Trinity Indus., Inc. v. Chicago Bridge and Iron Co., 867 F.Supp.2d 754 (W.D. Pa. 2012) (Site owner did not incur cleanup costs under CERCLA) Text

U.S. v. EME Homer City Generation L.P., 823 F.Supp.2d 274 (W.D. Pa. 2011) (Alleged violations of CAA’s PSD require constituted separate failures) Text

Delaware Audubon Soc’y v. Salazar, 829 F.Supp.2d 273 (D. Del. 2011) (FWS’s EA did not violate NEPA) Text

U.S. v. Donovan, 661 F.3d 174 (3rd Cir. 2011) (Corps had jurisdiction under CWA to compel removal of fill material from wetlands) Text

U.S. v. Righter, No. 1:08-CV-0670, 2010 WL 2640189 (M.D. Pa. 2010) (Land qualified as wetland under CWA) Text

U.S. v. Kramer, 757 F.Supp.2d 511 (D. N.J. 2010) (Settling parties in Superfund action could bring contribution claim under CERCLA against non-settling parties) Text

United States v. Rohm & Haas Co., No. 09-5528 (FLW), 2010 WL 3811302 (D. N.J. Sept. 22, 2010) (equitable tolling under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act)  Text

Animal Welfare Inst. v. Beech Ridge Energy LLC, — F.Supp.2d —, 2009 WL 4884520 (D. Md. 2009) (challenge to wind farm that it would take an endangered species)  Text

Del. Audubon Soc’y, Inc. v. Sec’y of the United States Dep’t of Interior, No. 06-223-GMS, 2009 WL 763925 (D. Del. Mar. 24, 2009) (violation of various environmental laws for entering into cooperative farming agreements in wildlife refuge)  Text

Mangan v. Brierre, Civil Action No. 06-3204, 2007 WL 475820 (E.D. Pa. 2007) (CERCLA)   Text

Mortellite v. Novartis Crop Prot., Inc., 460 F.3d 483 (3d Cir. 2006) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Nat’l Res. Def. Council v. EPA, No. Civ. RDB 03-2444, 2005 WL 1241904 (D. Md. 2005) (ESA citizen suit)

Reynolds v. Rick’s Mushroom Serv., Inc., 246 F.Supp.2d 449 (E.D. Pa. 2003) (CWA violation; waste from mushroom processor)   Text

Am. Littoral Soc’y v. U.S. EPA, 199 F.Supp.2d 217 (D.N.J. 2002) (review of state approved CWA water bodies lists)   Text


 

FOURTH CIRCUIT

S. Appalachian Mountain Stewards, et al. v. Red River Coal Co., Inc., No. 2:17CV00028, 2019 WL 4674318 (W.D. Va. Sept. 24, 2019) (Discharging pollutants without a permit) Text

Dixon Lumber Co., Inc. v. Austinville Limestone Co., Inc., 386 F.Supp.3d 688 (W.D. Va. 2019) (Agreement did not transfer all responsibility for CERCLA costs) Text

Foster v. U.S. EPA, No. 2:14-CV-16744, 2019 WL 4145583 (S.D. W. Va. Aug. 29, 2019) (Filling a WOTUS without a Section 404 permit) Text

Save Our Sound OBX, Inc. v. North Carolina Dep’t of Transp., 914 F.3d 213 (4th Cir. 2019) (FHA did not violate NEPA) Text

Cowpasture River Pres. Ass’n v. Forest Serv., 911 F.3d 150 (4th Cir. 2018) (USFS’s FEIS for pipeline violated NEPA) Text

Sierra Club v. Virginia Elect. & Power Co., 903 F.3d 403 (4th Cir. 2018) (Water pollution caused by coal ash governed by RCRA, not CWA) Text

Sierra Club v. State Water Control Bd., 898 F.3d 383 (4th Cir. 2018) (Certifying natural gas pipeline under CWA) Text

Sierra Club, Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 897 F.3d 582 (4th Cir. 2018) (USFS acted arbitrarily and capriciously under NEPA in adopting sedimentation analysis in its EIS) Text

Ergon-West Virginia, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, 896 F.3d 600 (4th Cir. 2018) (EPA analysis was arbitrary and capricious under CAA) Text

Ohio Valley Entvl. Coal., Inc. v. Pruitt, 893 F.3d 225 (4th Cir. 2018) (Submission of TMDLs for biologically impaired waters to EPA) Text

Upstate Forever v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., 887 F.3d 637 (4th Cir. 2018) (Discharge directly from a point source into navigable waters not required for a violation of the CWA) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 899 F.3d 260 (4th Cir. 2018) (Take limits in incidental take statement from FWS authorizing natural gas pipeline were arbitrary and capricious.) Text

Dixon Lumber Co., Inc. v. Austinville Limestone Co., Inc., 256 F.Supp.3d 658 (Mine operator did not assume any environmental liability of previous owner under CERCLA) Text

Upstate Forever v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., 252 F.Supp.3d 488 (D. S.C. 2017) (Discharge into groundwater not hydrologically connected to surface water not a CWA violation) Text

Sierra Club v. Virginia Elec. and Power Co., 247 F.Supp.3d 753 (E.D. Va. 2017) (Discharge into groundwater a violation of CWA) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Fola Coal Co., LLC, 845 F.3d 133 (4th Cir. 2017) (NPDES permit did not remove liability from coal company for unlawful discharges) Text

Blankenship v. Consolidation Coal Co., 850 F.3d 630 (4th Cir. 2017) (Landowners failed to state claim for CERCLA violation against coal mine) Text

Murray Energy Corp. v. McCarthy, 232 F.Supp.3d 895 (N.D. W. Va. 2017) (EPA failed to fully comply with CAA requirements) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 828 F.3d 316 (4th Cir. 2016) (Corps was not required to consider impacts of surface coal mining in its NEPA review of CWA permit) Text

307 Campostella, LLC v. Mullane, 143 F.Supp.3d 407 (E.D. Va. 2015) (Property owner stated citizen-suit claim under RCRA) Text

Yadkin Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 141 F.Supp.3d 428 (M.D. N.C. 2015) (Coal ash lagoons fell within CWA definition of point source) Text

PCS Nitrogen, Inc. v. Ross Dev. Corp., 104 F.Supp.3d 729 (D. S.C. 2015 (Involuntarily incurred cleanup costs are recoverable under section of CERCLA permitting cost-recovery) Text

Consolidation Coal Co. v. Georgia Power Co., 781 F.3d 129 (4th Cir. 2015) (Seller of transformers with PCBs could not be liable as arranger under CERCLA) Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. North Carolina Dep’t of Transp., 762 F.3d 374 (4th Cir. 2014) (Agencies did not act unlawfully under NEPA) Text

Sherrill v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 31 F.Supp.3d 750 (D. Md. 2014) (Permit issued by Maryland shielded permittee from RCRA liability) Text

Cape Hatteras Access Pres. All. v. Jewell, 28 F.Supp.3d 537 (E.D. N.C. 2014) (Use of two no action alternatives in EIS was not arbitrary and capricious under NEPA) Text

Cape Fear River Watch, Inc. v. Duke Energy Progress, Inc., 25 F.Supp.3d 798 (E.D. N.C. 2014) (Lake was a WOTUS subject to CWA jurisdiction) Text

U.S. v. Duke Energy Corp., 981 F.Supp.2d 435 (M.D. N.C. 2013) (EPA’s interpretation of CAA PSD requirement was entitled to deference) Text

Marcas, L.L.C. v. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs of St. Mary’s Cty., 977 F.Supp.2d 487 (D. Md. 2013) (Property owner was not entitled to recover costs incurred under CERCLA) Text

PCS Nitrogen Inc. v. Ashley II of Charleston LLC, 714 F.3d 161 (4th Cir. 2013) (Past owners of property were potentially responsible under CERCLA)  Text

Dow AgroSciences LLC v. National Marine Fisheries Service, 707 F.3d 462 (4th Cir. 2013) (Opinion that unrestricted registration of products would jeopardize the existence of protected salmonid species was arbitrary and capricious.) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Marfork Coal Co., Inc., 966 F.Supp.2d 667 (S.D. W. Va. 2013) (Permit holder could not discharge pollutants that violated water quality standards) Text

Webster v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 685 F.3d 411 (4th Cir. 2012) (Agency was not required to undertake additional scoping determination when issuing SEIS in compliance with NEPA) Text

Friends of Back Bay v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 681 F.3d 581 (4th Cir. 2012) (Corps decision not to prepare EIS was arbitrary and capricious) Text

North Carolina Wildlife Fed’n v. North Carolina Dep’t of Trasp., 677 F.3d 596 (4th Cir. 2012) (State agency violated NEPA by failing to disclose information to public) Text

Ashley II of Charleston, LLC v. PCS Nitrogen, Inc., 791 F.Supp.2d 431 (D. S.C. 2011) (Landowner established existence of actionable CERCLA facility) Text

U.S. v. Freedman Farms, Inc., 786 F.Supp.2d 1016 (E.D. N.C. 2011) (CWA granted jurisdiction in event of significant nexus between wetlands and navigable waters) Text

Precon Dev. Corp., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 633 F.3d 278 (4th Cir. 2011) (No significant nexus between wetlands and navigable river) Text

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, Inc. v. Huffman, 625 F.3d 159 (4th Cir. 2010) (Efforts to reclaim abandoned coal mining sites required NPDES permit) Text

North Carolina, ex rel. Cooper v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 615 F.2d 291 (4th Cir. 2010) (emissions of coal-fired power plants were not a public nuisance)  Text

PCS Nitrogen v. Ross Dev. Corp., No. 2:09-3171-MBS, 2010 WL 2892619 (D. S.C. Sept. 30, 2010) (liability for clean of costs for soil contamination by phosphate fertilizer plant operator)  Text

Allegheny Energy Supply Co. v. Spitzer, No. 1:05CV04, 2010 WL 3220355 (N.D. W.Va. Aug. 12, 2010) (Clean Air Act)  Text

Assateague Coastkeeper v. Alan and Kristin Hudson Farm, No. WMN-10-cv-0487, 2010 WL 2924661 (D. Md. July 21, 2010) (discharges of poultry manure)  Text

The Piney Run Pres. Ass’n v. County Comm’rs of Carroll County, Md., 523 F.3d 453 (4th Cir. 2008) (“diligent” prosecution by state)   Text

Wyatt v. Sussex Surry, LLC, 482 F.Supp.2d 740 (E.D. Va. 2007) (CWA does not preempt state common law claims)   Text        Text

Potomac Riverkeeper, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, No. RDB 04-38845, 2006 WL 890755 (D. Md. March 31, 2006) (lack of jurisdiction, time limits on states to create TMDLs)

Bourne ex rel. Bourne v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 85 Fed. App’x 964 (4th Cir. 2004) (toxic tort)

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coalition v. Horinko, 279 F.Supp.2d 732 (S.D. W. Va. 2003) (state antidegradation policy)   Text

N.C. Shellfish Growers Ass’n v. Holly Ridge Assoc., L.L.C, 278 F.Supp.2d 654 (E.D. N.C. 2003) (jurisdiction, point source, pollutant, discharge)   Text

American Canoe Ass’n v. Murphy Farms, 326 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 2003) (CWA)  Text

O’Brien v. Appomattox County, 213 F. Supp. 2d 627 (W.D. Va. 2002) (county ordinance to prevent the application of biosolids)   Text

S. States Coop. Inc. v. I.S.P. Co., 198 F.Supp.2d 807 (N.D. W. Va. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)   Text


 

FIFTH CIRCUIT

Sierra Club v. U.S. EPA, 939 F.3d 649 (5th Cir. 2019) (EPA’s approval of best available technology was not arbitrary and capricious under CAA) Text

Clean Water Action v. U.S. EPA, 936 F.3d 308 (5th Cir. 2019) (EPA did not violate CWA provisions regarding effluent limitations) Text

Southwester Elec. Power Co. v. U.S. EPA, 920 F.3d 999 (5th Cir. 2019) (EPA acted arbitrarily and capriciously in promulgating effluent limitation guidelines) Text

Hollingsworth v. Vilsack, 366 F.Supp.3d 766 (W.D. La. 2018) (Plaintiffs had standing to bring suit under NEPA) Text

U.S. v. Luminant Generation Co., LLC, 905 F.3d 874 (5th Cir. 2018) (Determining when limitations period began to run for government’s CAA claims) Text

Exxon Mobil Corp. v. U.S., 335 F.Supp.3d 889 (S.D. Tex. 2018) (Court would use modify approach to determine allocation of CERCLA costs) Text

U.S. Oil Recovery Site Potentially Responsible Parties Group v. R.R. Comm’n of Texas, 898 F.3d 497 (5th Cir. 2018) (State agencies and university were entitled to sovereign immunity from CERCLA claim) Text

16 Front Street, L.L.C. v. Mississippi Silicon, L.L.C., 886 F.3d 549 (5th Cir. 2018) (Property owner was not authorized to bring claim under CAA citizen suit provision) Text

USOR Site PRP Group v. A & M Contractors, Inc., 275 F.Supp.3d 808 (S.D. Tex. 2017) (City’s operation of wastewater treatment facility gave rise to CERCLA liability) Text

USOR Site PRP Group v. Bealine Service Co., Inc., 262 F.Supp.3d 467 (S.D. Tex. 2017) (Waste transportation company was subject to transporter liability under CERCLA) Text

Texas v. U.S. EPA, 829 F.3d 405 (5th Cir. 2016) (Plaintiffs were entitled to a stay of final EPA CAA rule controlling regional haze) Text

Env’t Texas Citizen Lobby, Inc. v. ExxonMobil Corp., 824 F.3d 507 (5th Cir. 2016) (Court abused its discretion in determining penalty for CAA violations) Text

Gulf Restoration Network v. Jackson, 224 F.Supp.3d 470 (E.D. La. 2016) (EPA gave adequate explanation for not making determination about new water quality standard) Text

Town of Abita Springs v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 153 F.Supp.3d 894 (E.D. La. 2015) (Corps determination of no practicable non-wetland alternatives to build test well on was reasonable) Text

MEMC Pasadena, Inc. v. Goodgames Indus. Sol., LLC, 143 F.Supp.3d 570 (S.D. Tex. 2015) (Environmental waste broke was subject to CERCLA liability) Text

Dune Energy, Inc. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 126 F.Supp.3d 688 (E.D. La. 2015) (Claim sufficiently stated under CERCLA) Text

Riverkeeper v. Taylor Energy Co., L.LC., 117 F.Supp.3d 849 (E.D. La. 2015) (Issues of fact existed as to whether energy company violated RCRA) Text

Exxon Mobil Corp. v. U.S., 108 F.Supp.3d 486 (S.D. Tex. 2015) (Government and company had previous “operate” site for purposes of CERCLA) Text

In re Deepwater Horizon, 753 F.3d 570 (5th Cir. 2014) (Owners of offshore oil well were subject to CWA penalties for discharge of oil into Gulf of Mexico) Text

Louisiana Dep’t of Envtl. Quality v. U.S. EPA, 730 F.3d 446 (5th Cir. 2013) (EPA objection to CAA permits issued by the state was not a final action subject to judicial review) Text

Zen-Noh Grain Corp. v. Jackson, 943 F.Supp.2d 657 (E.D. La. 2013) (Action to compel EPA to revoke permits did not fall within scope of CAA’s waiver of sovereign immunity) Text

Aransas Project v. Shaw, 930 F.Supp.2d 716 (S.D. Tex. 2013) (Failure of state agency to properly manage freshwater flows into bay caused unlawful take under ESA) Text

Sierra Club v. Energy Future Holdings Corp., 921 F.Supp.2d 674 (W.D. Tex. 2013) (Notice letter to coal plant sufficiently alleged CAA violation dates) Text

Texas v. U.S. EPA, 690 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2012) (EPA arbitrarily rejected Texas’s revised CAA plan) Text

Luminant Generation Co., L.L.C. v. U.S. EPA, 675 F.3d 917 (EPA’s disapproval of Texas’s pollution control projects under CAA was arbitrary and capricious) Text

Atchafalaya Basinkeeper v. Chustz, 682 F.3d 356 (5th Cir. 2012) (CWA does not allow citizens to sue to enforce conditions of permits for discharge of dredged or fill material) Text

Board of Mississippi Levee Comm’rs v. U.S. EPA, 674 F.3d 409 (5th Cir. 2012) (Flood control project not within CWA exemption from regulation) Text

U.S. v. Brink 795 F.Supp.2d 565 (S.D. Tex. 2011) (Landowners deposited fill material into creek without a discharge permit) Text

Board of Mississippi Levee Comm’rs v. U.S. EPA, 785 F.Supp.2d 592 (N.D. Miss. 2011) (Flood control project not exempt from CWA regulation) Text

The Aransas Project v. Shaw, No. C-10-75, 2010 WL 2522415 (S.D. Tex. June 17, 2010) (Endangered Species Act challenge)  Text

United States v. Lucas, 516 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 2008) (discharges by septic tank into wetlands)   Text

C.C. Prine v. BASF Corp., Civil Action No. 06-0966, 2006 WL 2294822 (M.D. La. 2006) (FIFRA)  Text

Morgan v. Powe Timber Co., 367 F.Supp. 2d 1032 (S.D. Miss. 2005)(injuries from pesticide use)   Text

W. Tex. Agriplex v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., No. Civ.A. 5:03-CV-199-C, 2004 WL 1515122 (N.D. Tex. 2004)(fertilizer dealer liability)   Text

Fanguy v. Eastover Country Club L.L.C., No. Civ.A. 01-3778, 2002 WL 1888901 (E.D. La.) (toxic tort)

Shields v. Norton, 289 F.3d 832 (5th Cir. 2002) (action to declare ESA taking provision unconstitutional not ripe for judicial review).   Text

Agrosciences v. Bates, No. CIV.A. 5:01-CV-331-C, 2002 WL 1205143 (N.D. Tex. 2002) (FIFRA; procedural ruling)    Text

Sierra Club v. Glickman, 156 F.3d 606 (5th Cir. 1998) (aquifer-dependant species).   Text


 

SIXTH CIRCUIT

Ward v. Stucke, No. 3:18-CV-00263, 2019 WL 3350161 (S.D. Ohio July 24, 2019) (Wetlands were navigable water subject to CWA jurisdiction) Text

Ohio ex rel. DeWine v. Breen, 362 F.Supp.3d 420 (S.D. Ohio 2019) (Owners and operators of extermination company were liable under CERCLA) Text

Envtl. Law and Policy Ctr. V. U.S. EPA, 349 F.Supp.3d 703 (N.D. Ohio 2018) (EPA approval of state impaired waters list was not final agency action) Text

Kentucky Waterways All. v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 905 F.3d 925 (6th Cir. 2018) (No CWA liability for pollution that reaches surface water via groundwater) Text

Tennessee Clean Water Network v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 905 F.3d 436 (6th Cir. 2018) (CWA did not prohibit discharge of pollutants to groundwater that connect to navigable waterway) Text

Hobart Corp. v. Dayton Power & Light Co., 336 F.Supp.3d 888 (S.D. Ohio 2018) (Plaintiffs’ contribution claim constituted a civil action under CERCLA) Text

Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP v. NCR Corp., 358 F.Supp.3d 613 (W.D. Mich. 2018) (Fact that owner received insurance payments to help cover liability costs did not preclude owner’s recovery of cleanup costs under CERCLA) Text

Little Traverse Lake Prop. Owners Ass’n v. Nat’l Park Serv., 883 F.3d 644 (6th Cir. 2018) (Residents failed to preserve NEPA claims against NPS) Text

Kentucky Waterways All. v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 303 F.Supp.3d 530 (E.D. Ky. 2017) (Discharge of pollutants into groundwater that connected to navigable water was not subject to CWA permitting requirement) Text

Tennessee Clean Water Network v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 273 F.Supp.3d 775 (M.D. Tenn. 2017) (Active ash pond complex violated CWA) Text

U.S. v. DTE Energy Corp., 845 F.3d 735 (6th Cir. 2017) (Operator of coal-fired plan subject to enforcement for failure to comply with CAA) Text

Little Traverse Lake Prop. Owners Ass’n v. Nat’l Park Serv., 223 F.Supp.3d 691 (W.D. Mich. 2016) (Plaintiffs waived their objections to NEPA document prepared by NPS) Text

Sherwood v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 842 F.3d 400 (6th Cir. 2016) (Property owners’ NEPA claim was not moot) Text

Tennessee Clean Water Network v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 206 F.Supp.3d 1280 (M.D. Tenn. 2016) (NPDES permit did not extend to any and all types of coal ash seepage) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Forest Serv., 828 F.3d 402 (6th Cir. 2016) (EIS was not required for renewal of special use permit for oil pipeline) Text

In re U.S. Dep’t of Defense, U.S. EPA Final Rule: Clean Water Rule: Definition of Waters of U.S., 817 F.3d 261 (6th Cir. 2016) (Final WOTUS definition rule was subject to direct circuit court review) Text

Merrick v. Diageo Americas Supply, Inc., 805 F.3d 685 (6th Cir. 2015) (CAA did not preempt property owners’ common law claims) Text

Kentucky Coal Ass’n, Inc. v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 804 F.3d 799 (6th Cir. 2015) (Agency acted within its discretion in preparing NEPA documents) Text

Elmer v. S.H. Bell Co., 127 F.Supp.3d 812 (N.D. Ohio 2015) (Residents’ state law claims were not preempted by CAA) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. EPA,793 F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015) (EPA could not approve SIP that did not provide for implementation of certain CAA requirements) Text

St. Marys Cement Inc. v. U.S. EPA, 782 F.3d 280 (6th Cir. 2015) (EPA determination that cement plant was required under CAA to install new technology was reasonable) Text

Kentucky Coal Ass’n, Inc. v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 68 F.Supp.3d 703 (W.D. Ky. 2015) (TVA’s issuance of FONSI pursuant to NEPA was reasonable) Text

In re EPA, 803 F.3d 804 (6th Cir. 2015) (Stay of enforcement of Clean Water Rule was reasonable) Text

Partners in Forestry Co-op. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 45 F.Supp.3d 677 (W.D. Mich. 2014) (Forest Service did not violate NEPA in determining proposed plan would have no significant consequences) Text

Tennessee Envtl. Council v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 32 F.Supp.3d 876 (E.D. Tenn. 2014) (Agency’s decision not to issue EIS was reasonable) Text

Latin Americans for Social and Economic Dev. V. Adm’r of Federal Highway Admin., 756 F.3d 477 (Decision to have bridge between US and Canada be owned by government did not violate NEPA) Text

Klein v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy, 753 F.3d 576 (6th Cir. 2014) (Agency issuance of FONSI was not arbitrary or capricious) Text

Merrick v. Diageo Americas Supply, Inc., 5 F.Supp.3d 865 (W.D. Ky. 2014) (CAA did not preempt tort law claims) Text

Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 746 F.3d 698 (6th Cir. 2014) (Corps did not violate NEPA in decided to issue dredge and fill permit) Text

Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 963 F.Supp.2d 670 (W.D. Ky. 2013) (Corps complied with federal law in approving CWA permit) Text

Coal. for Advancement of Regional Transp. V. Federal Highway Admin, 959 F.Supp.2d 982 (W.D. Ky. 2013) (Two proposed bridge projects were connected actions that could be considered under one NEPA document) Text

Kentucky Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Rowlette, 714 F.3d 402 (6th Cir. 2013) (Agency reauthorization of nationwide coal-mining waste-discharge permit was arbitrary and capricious) Text

U.S. v. DTE Energy Co., 711 F.3d 643 (6th Cir. 2013) (Preconstruction projection was subject to review to determine compliance with CAA regulations) Text

Summit Petroleum Corp. v. U.S. EPA, 690 F.3d 733 (6th Cir. 2012) (EPA’s interpretation of CAA undermined the plaint meaning of the text) Text

Sierra Club v. Korleski, 681 F.3d 342 (6th Cir. 2012) (CAA’s citizen suit provision did not permit citizen suits against state regulators) Text

500 Assoc., Inc. v. Vermont American Corp., 768 F.Supp.2d 914 (W.D. Ky. 2011) (Purchaser could not recover clean up costs from former owner under CERCLA) Text

Meister v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 623 F.3d 363 (6th Cir. 2010) (challenge to revised management plan for forests involving snowmobile use and cross-country skiing)  Text

Lozar v. Birds Eye Food, Inc., No. 1:09-cv-10, 2010 WL 2231831 (W.D. Mich. June 1, 2010) (claims of violations of RCRA and CERCLA)  Text

Lozar v. Birds Eye Food, Inc., No. 1:09-cv-10, 2009 WL 5196154 (W.D. Mich. Dec. 22, 2009) (claims of violations of RCRA and CERCLA)  Text

Nat’l Cotton Council of Am. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 553 F.3d 927 (6th Cir. 2009) (exemption of pesticides from the Clean Water Act)  Text

Kentucky Waterways Alliance v. Johnson, 426 F.Supp.2d 612 (W.D. Ky. 2006) (EPA sued for approval of CWA rules)   Text

Tungett v. Papierski, No. 3:05-CV-289, 2006 WL 51148 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 10, 2006) (subject matter over citizen suits)  Text

Johnson County Citizen Committee for Clean Air and Water v. EPA, No. 3:05-0222, 2005 WL 2204953 (M.D. Tenn. Sept. 9, 2005) (state NPDES permit)

Perry v. Se. Boll Weevil Eradication Found., 154 F. App’x 467 (6th Cir. 2005) (spraying insecticide as “taking”)

Am. Canoe Ass’n, Inc. v. City of Louisa Water & Sewer Comm’n, 389 F.3d 536 (6th Cir. 2004) (standing to bring citizen suit)   Text

Sierra Club, Inc. v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 299 F.Supp.2d 693 (W.D. Ky. 2003) (definition of “facility” under CERCLA)  Text


 

SEVENTH CIRCUIT

Haber Land Co. Ltd. V. American Steel City Indus. Leasing, Inc., 388 F.Supp.3d 1050 (S.D. Ind. 2019) (Purchaser of farmland sufficiently stated claim under CERCLA) Text

LAJIM, LLC v. Gen. Elec. Co., 917 F.3d 933 (7th Cir. 2019) (District court had discretion to award injunctive relief under RCRA) Text

Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin v. U.S. EPA, 360 F.Supp.3d 847 (E.D. Wis. 2018) (CWA citizen suit provision does not waive sovereign immunity of Corps) Text

Prairie Rivers Network v. Dynergy Midwest Generation, LLC, 350 F.Supp.3d 697 (C.D. Ill. 2018) (CWA did not apply to discharges of pollutants into groundwater) Text

Highway J Citizens Group v. U.S. Dep’t of Transp., 891 F.3d 697 (7th Cir. 2018) (EIS was not required for proposed renovation of highway) Text

Clean Harbor Serv., Inc. v. Illinois Int’l, Port District, 309 F.Supp.3d 556 (N.D. Ill. 2018) (Waste processor established standing to allege violations of RCRA permit) Text

Orchard Hill Bldg. Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 893 F.3d 1017 (7th Cir. 2018) (Corps failed to give evidence that wetlands were jurisdictional WOTUS) Text

In re Syngenta Mass Tort Actions, 272 F.Supp.3d 1074 (S.D. Ill. 2017) (Failure to warn claim asserted against biotechnology companies was preempted by FIFRA) Text

City of Evanston v. Northern Illinois Gas Co., 229 F.Supp.3d 714 (N.D. Ill. 2017) (Municipality stated endangerment claim under RCRA) Text

Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads v. Foxx, 815 F.3d 1068 (7th Cir. 2016) (SEIS was not required for interstate highway extension project) Text

Northern Illinois Gas Co. v. City of Evanston, Illinois, 162 F.Supp.3d 654 (N.D. Ill. 2016) (Methane gas did not meet definition of solid waste under RCRA) Text

U.S. v. Gearing, 141 F.Supp.3d 920 (C.D. Ill. 2015) (EPA’s demand to enter onto property was reasonable under CERCLA) Text

Northern States Power Co. v. City of Ashland, Wis., 131 F.Supp.3d 802 (W.D. Wis. 2015) (City that did not contribute to contamination did not have to contribute to CERCLA cleanup costs) Text

Indiana v. EPA, 796 F.3d 803 (7th Cir. 2015) (EPA did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in approving Illinois’s SIP) Text

Openlands v. U.S. Dep’t of Transp., 124 F.Supp.3d 796 (N.D. Ill. 2015) (EIS violated NEPA) Text

Hamrick v. Gen. Serv. Admin., 107 F.Supp.3d 910 (C.D. Ill. 2015) (Defendant violated NEPA) Text

Quad Cities Waterkeeper v. Ballegeer, 84 F.Supp.3d 848 (C.D. Ill. 2015) (Pollutants discharge violated CWA) Text

Northern States Power Co. v. City of Ashland, Wis., 93 F.Supp.3d 958 (W.D. Wis. 2015) (Soil extraction and groundwater cleanup was remedial action under CERCLA) Text

Stillwater of Crown Point Homeowner’s Ass’n, Inc. v. Stiglich, 999 F.Supp.2d 1111 (N.D. Ind. 2014) (Property development companies’ managing director personally liable for CWA violations) Text

Wisconsin Res. Protection Council v. Flambeau Min. Co., 727 F.3d 700 (7th Cir. 2013) (Mining company not liable under CWA) Text

U.S. v. Midwest Generation, LLC, 720 F.3d 644 (7th Cir. 2013) (Alleged CAA violations were not continuing violations)  Text

Milwaukee Inner-City Congregations Allied for Hope v. Gottlieb, 944 F.Supp.2d 656 (W.D. Wis. 2013) (Plaintiffs were likely to succeed on NEPA claim) Text

Frey v. U.S. EPA, 937 F.Supp.2d 964 (S.D. Ind. 2013) (EPA satisfied CERCLA mandate to protect public health) Text

U.S. v. NCR Corp. 688 F.3d 833 (7th Cir. 2012) (Potentially responsible party under CERCLA failed to prove the harm was capable of apportionment) Text

Emergency Serv. Billing Corp., Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 668 F.3d 459 (7th Cir. 2012) (Motor vehicles owned for personal use were not facilities for purposes of CERCLA) Text

Stillwater of Crown Point Homeowner’s Ass’n, Inc. v. Kovich, 820 F.Supp.2d 859 (N.D. Ind. 2011) (Ditch and wetlands were navigable waters under CWA) Text

Nat. Res. Def. Council v. Jackson, 650 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 2011) (State implantation plan program did not violate CAA) Text

Habitat Educ. Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 680 F.Supp.2d 996 (E.D. Wis. 2010) (compliance with NEPA)  Text

Habitat Educ. Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 680 F.Supp.2d 1007 (E.D. Wis. 2010) (compliance with NEPA)  Text

Nat’l Pork Producers Council v. Jackson, 638 F.Supp.2d 1020 (W.D. Wis. 2009) (EPCRA reporting requirements in agriculture; dismissal of claim as not justiciable)  Text

Nature Conservancy v. Wilder Corp. of Del., No. 06-1096, 2009 WL 1492177 (C.D. Ill. May 28, 2009) (seller liable under purchase agreement to clean up lagoons, petroleum tanks, and other trash)  Text

Habitat Educ. Ctr., Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 593 F.Supp.2d 1019 (E.D. Wis. 2009) (no violations of NEPA and National Forest Management Act)  Text

Croplife Am., Inc. v. City of Madison, 373 F.Supp. 2d 905 (W.D. Wis. 2005) (constitutionality of county fertilizer ordinances)   Text

Test Drilling Service Co. v. Hanor Co., 322 F.Supp.2d 965 (C.D. Ill. 2004) (property damage)  Text

Greenfield Mills, Inc. v. Macklin, 361 F.3d 934 (7th Cir. 2004) (§ 404 permit)  Text

LeVake v. Zawistowski, No. 02-C-0657-C, 2003 WL 23200367 (W.D. Wis. 2003) (pesticide overspray)

Save The Valley, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A., 223 F.Supp.2d 997 (S.D.Ind. 2002) (implementation of CWA)

In re StarLink Corn Prod. Liab. Litig., 212 F.Supp. 2d 828 (N.D. Ill. 2002) (GMO) July 11, 2002


 

EIGHTH CIRCUIT

Lakes and Parks All. of Minneapolis v. Fed. Transit Admin., 928 F.3d 759 (8th Cir. 2019) (Non-profit corporation did not possess private right of action under NEPA) Text

Kitchin v. Bridgeton Landfill, LLC, 389 F.Supp.3d 600 (E.D. Mo. 2019) (CERCLA did not preempt property owners’ claims) Text

U.S. v. Ameren Missouri, 372 F.Supp.3d 868 (E.D. Mo. 2019) (CAA authorized district court to grant injunctive relief) Text

In re Dicamba Herbicides Litigation, 359 F.Supp.3d 711 (E.D. Mo. 2019) (Farmers’ state law claims were not preempted by FIFRA) Text

Voigt v. Coyote Creek Mining Co., LLC, 329 F.Supp.3d 735 (D. N.D. 2018) (Open storage coal pile not subject to mine’s CAA standards) Text

U.S. v. Dico, Inc., 265 F.Supp.3d 902 (S.D. Iowa) (Sellers of buildings contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls were liable under CERCLA) Text

City of Lake Elmo v. 3M Company, 237 F.Supp.3d 877 (D. Minn. 2017) (City had standing to bring CERCLA claim) Text

Richland/Wilkin Joint Powers Auth. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 826 F.3d 1030 (8th Cir. 2016) (Power authorities likely to succeed on NEPA claim) Text

Richland/Wilkin Joint Powers Auth. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 176 F.Supp.3d 839 (D. Minn. 2016) (Corps adequately considered alternative plan in preparing EIS) Text

Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. McCarthy, 816 F.3d 989 (8th Cir. 2016) (EPA’s approval of Minnesota’s regional haze plan was not arbitrary and capricious) Text

Nebraska v. U.S. EPA, 812 F.3d 662 (8th Cir. 2016) (Was within EPA’s statutory authority under CAA to disapprove Nebraska’s regional haze plan) Text

Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. McCarthy, 811 F.3d 1005 (8th Cir. 2016) (EPA’s decision to approve Minnesota’s haze was not arbitrary or capricious under CAA) Text

U.S. v. Missouri, 158 F.Supp.3d 802 (E.D. Mo. 2016) (Federal definition of “major modification” under CAA preempted state’s definition) Text

North Dakota v. U.S. EPA, 127 F.Supp.3d 1047 (D. N.D. 2015) (States likely to succeed on the merits in action challenging EPA’s WOTUS rule) Text

Lakes and Parks All. of Minneapolis v. Fed. Transit Admin., 91 F.Supp.3d 1105 (D. Minn. 2015) (Plaintiffs had narrow cause of action under NEPA) Text

Hawkes Co., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 782 F.3d 994 (8th Cir. 2015) (Corps determination that property constituted navigable waters was final decision) Text

Ouachita Watch League v. Henry, 59 F.Supp.3d 922 (E.D. Ark. 2014) (Allegations were sufficient to state NEPA claim) Text

El Dorado Chemical Co. v. U.S. EPA, 763 F.3d 950 (8th Cir. 2014) (EPA rejection of dissolved minerals water quality criteria was reasonable) Text

North Dakota v. U.S. EPA, 730 F.3d 750 (8th Cir. 2013) (EPA’s disapproval of certain parts of North Dakota’s CAA implementation plan was arbitrary and capricious) Text

Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of Lake Traverse Reservation v. U.S. Corps of Eng’rs, 918 F.Supp.2d 962 (D. S.D. 2013) (Corps’ nationwide permit determinations were subject to judicial review) Text

U.S. v. Huseby, 862 F.Supp.2d 951 (D. Minn. 2012) (Landowner’s activities fell within CWA recapture provision) Text

Minnesota Ctr. for Envtl. Advocacy v. U.S. Forest Serv., 914 F.Supp.2d 957 (D. Minn. 2012) (USFS’s decision not to prepare an EIS was not arbitrary and capricious) Text

Missouri Coal. for the Env’t Found. v. Jackson, 853 F.Supp.2d 903 (W.D. Mo. 2012) (EPA approval of water quality standards not arbitrary and capricious) Text

Friends of the Norbeck v. U.S. Forest Serv., 661 F.3d 969 (8th Cir. 2011) (Plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies before bringing NEPA claim) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 645 F.3d 978 (8th Cir. 2011) (Preliminary injunction necessary to halt activity that violated NEPA and ESA) Text

Friends of the Norbeck and Native Ecosystems Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 780 F.Supp.2d 975 (D. S.D. 2011) (EIS complied with NEPA) Text

Sierra Club v. Clinton, 746 F.Supp.2d 1025 (D. Minn. 2010) (Not necessary to include assessment of trans-boundary impacts in EIS) Text

Sierra Club v. Kimbell, 623 F.3d 549 (8th Cir. 2010) (USFS complied with NEPA) Text

Yankton Sioux Tribe Head Start Concerned Parents v. Longview Farms, LLP, No. CIV. 08-4058, 2009 WL 891866 (D. S.D. Mar. 31, 2009) (no violations of NEPA and historical preservation act by non-federal entity; no alleged violations of CWA and CAA by farrowing operation)  Text

Sierra Club v. Kimbell, 595 F.Supp.2d 1021 (D. Minn. 2009) (review of forest management plant)  Text

Avila v. CNH Am., LLC, Nos. 4:04CV3384, 4:07CV3170, 2009 WL 151600 (D. Neb. Jan. 2, 2006) (subsurface contamination)  Text

Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v. Harvey, 574 F.Supp.2d 934 (E.D. Ark. Aug. 8, 2008) (Endangered Species Act violations)  Text

Ogeechee-Canoochee Riverkeeper, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, No. 606CV102, 2008 WL 2199369 (S.D. Ga. May 27, 2008) (silviculture exemption to § 404)  Text

Thomas v. U.S. EPA, No. C06-0115, 2007 WL 4439483 (N.D. Iowa Dec. 17, 2007) (removal and addition of impaired waterbodies)

United States v. Bailey, 516 F.Supp.2d 998 (D. Minn. 2007) (scope of wetlands protection)  Text

K.C.1986 Ltd. P’ship v. Reade Mfg., 472 F.3d 1009 (8th Cir. 2007) (CERCLA)  Text

Green Acres Enter., Inc. v. United States, 418 F.3d 852 (8th Cir. 2005) (taking, “incidental fallback”)  Text

Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy v. U.S. E.P.A, No. CIV03-5450(DWF/SRN), 2005 WL 1490331 (D. Minn. June 23, 2005) (invalidating state TMDL)

Dahlman Farms, Inc. v. FMC Corp., 240 F.Supp. 2d 1012 (D.Minn. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)  Text

Mo. Soybean Ass’n v. EPA, 289 F.3d 509 (8th Cir. 2002) (jurisdiction)  Text

Netland v. Hess & Clark, Inc., 284 F.3d 895 (8th Cir. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)   Text


 

NINTH CIRCUIT

Western Watersheds Project v. Schneider, No. 1:16-CV-83-BLW 2019 WL 5225454 (D. Idaho Oct. 16, 2019) (BLM likely violated NEPA) Text

Swan View Coal. v. Weber, No. 19-35004 2019 WL 3717908 (9th Cir. Aug. 7, 2019) (FWS satisfied all ESA obligations) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Bernhardt, 392 F.Supp.3d 1225 (D. Or. 2019) (Plaintiffs likely to succeed on claim that BLM violated NEPA) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Ilano, 928 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2019) (USFS action did not require NEPA review) Text

Bark v. U.S. Forest Serv., 393 F.Supp.3d 1043 (D. Or. 2019) (USFS did not violate NEPA by considering only proposed action and no action alternative) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Provencio, 923 F.3d 655 (9th Cir. 2019) (USFS reasonably determined that EIS was not needed) Text

California v. U.S. EPA, 385 F.Supp.3d 903 (N.D. Cal. 2019) (Plaintiffs entitled to declaratory judgment that EPA violated CAA) Text

Bair v. California State Dep’t of Transp., 385 F.Supp.3d 878 (N.D. Cal. 2019) (CDT violated NEPA) Text

Citizens for Clean Energy v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 384 F.Supp.3d 1264 (D. Mont. 2019) (Government obligated under NEPA to undertake environmental analysis) Text

Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. U.S. EPA, 377 F.Supp.3d 1156 (D. Mont. 2019) (EPA was arbitrary and capricious in allowing dischargers 17 years to meet standards) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Total Terminals Int’l, LLC, 371 F.Supp.3d 857 (W.D. Wash. 2019) (Port could be liable for tenant’s discharges) Text

Triumvirate, LLC v. Bernhardt, 367 F.Supp.3d 1011 (D. Alaska 2019) (BLM violated NEPA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Jeffries, 370 F.Supp.3d 1208 (D. Or. 2019) (USFS violated ESA and NEPA) Text

Friends of Animals v. Silvey, 353 F.Supp.3d 991 (D. Nev. 2018) (BLM satisfied its obligations under NEPA) Text

Indigenous Envtl. Network v. U.S. Dep’t of State, 347 F.Supp.3d 561 (D. Mont. 2018) (Department of State violated NEPA) Text

Havasupai Tribe v. Provencio, 906 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2018) (USFS’s mineral report did not require preparation of EIS) Text

Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. U.S. Forest Serv., 907 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2018) (USFS violated NEPA and NFMA) Text

Columbia Riverkeeper v. Pruitt, 337 F.Supp.3d 989 (W.D. Wash. 2018) (EPA violated CWA by failing to issue TMDLs) Text

Cascadia Wildlands v. Carlton, 341 F.Supp.3d 1195 (D. Or. 2018) (USFS complied with NEPA) Text

Montana Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Thomas, 902 F.3d 971 (9th Cir. 2018) (EPA’s interpretation of CAA regulation was reasonable) Text

Indigenous Envtl. Network v. U.S. Dep’t of State, 317 F.Supp.3d 1118 (D. Mont. 2018) (State Department was required to issue supplemental EIS under NEPA) Text

League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wheeler, 899 F.3d 814 (9th Cir. 2018) (EPA was obligated to revoke tolerances for use of chlorpyrifos) Text

Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. Pruitt, 320 F.supp.3d 1115 (C.D. Cal. 2018) (EPA interpretation of CWA provision not entitled to deference) Text

Deschutes River All. v. Portland Gen. Elec. Co., 331 F.Supp.3d 1187 (D. Or. 2018) (CWA certification for project did not require strict compliance with state water quality criteria) Text

Native Ecosystems Council v. Erickson, 330 F.Supp.3d 1218 (D. Mont. 2018) (USFS not required to prepare EIS under NEPA) Text

Friends of Wild Swan v. Kehr, 321 F.Supp.3d 1179 (D. Mont. 2018) (USFS properly declined to prepare single EIS for two projects) Text

U.S. v. HVI Cat Canyon, Inc., 314 F.Supp.3d 1049 (C.D. Cal. 2018) (Wetlands had significant nexus with navigable water) Text

Friends of Santa Clara River v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 887 F.3d 906 (9th Cir. 2018) (Corps did not violate CWA by failing to select least environmentally damaging practicable alternative) Text

North Coast Rivers All. v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 313 F.Supp.3d 1199 (E.D. Cal 2018) (Grant of new right to water districts did not trigger EIS requirement) Text

Olympic Forest Coal. v. Coast Seafoods Co., 884 F.3d 901 (9th Cir. 2018) (CWA permit required for discharging pollutants from non-concentrated aquatic animal production facilities)  Text

Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten, 883 F.3d 783 (9th Cir. 2018) (Project’s EIS complied with NEPA) Text

AquAlliance v. U.S. Beauru of Reclamation, 287 F.Supp.3d 969 (E.D. Cal. 2018) (EIS violated NEPA) Text

Hawai’I Wildlife Fund v. Cty. of Maui, 881 F.3d 754 (9th Cir. 2018) (County’s discharge of pollutants into groundwater violated CWA) Text

Havasupai Tribe v. Provencio 876 F.3d 1242 (9th Cir. 2017) (EIS was not required under NEPA) Text

Wild Wilderness v. Allen, 871 F.3d 719 (9th Cir. 2017) (USFS did not violate NEPA or NFMA) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Ilano, 261 F.Supp.3d 1063 (E.D. Cal. 2017) (NEPA review did not apply to USFS determination) Text

Montana Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. U.S. Office of Surface Mining, 274 F.Supp.3d 1074 (D. Mont. 2017) (Environmental assessment violated NEPA) Text

All. for the Wild Rockies v. Bradford, 856 F.3d 1238 (9th Cir. 2017) (Barriered roads did not violate NEPA, ESA, or NFMA) Text

Ellis v. Housenger, 252 F.Supp.3d 800 (N.D. Cal. 2017) (EPA decision to convert FIFRA registrations triggered duty to consult under ESA) Text

Western Exploration, LLC v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 250 F.Supp.3d 718 (D. Nev. 2017) (BLM and USFS required to prepare supplemental EIS) Text

Protect Our Communities Found. v. Black, 240 F.Supp.3d 1055 (S.D. Cal. 2017) (EIS satisfied NEPA requirements) Text

Yurok Tribe v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 231 F.Supp.3d 450 (N.D. Cal. 2017) (Plaintiffs established that listed Coho salmon faced irreparable harm as result of increased infection rates.) Text

Ctr. for Envtl. Law and Policy v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 228 F.Supp.3d 1152 (E.D. Wash. 2017) (Hatchery’s discharging pollutants without NPDES permit violated CWA) Text

Great Basin Res. Watch v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 844 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2016) (BLM’s failure to quantify cumulative air impacts of proposed project violated NEPA) Text

Helping Hands Tools v. U.S. EPA, 848 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2016) (EPA did not abuse its discretion under CAA) Text

Japanese Village, LLC v. Fed. Transit Admin., 843 F.3d 445 (9th Cir. 2016) (EIS satisfied NEPA requirements) Text

Friends of Maha’ulepu, Inc. v. Hawai’I Dairy Farms, LLC, 224 F.Supp.3d 1094 (D. Haw. 2016) (Allegations that dairy farm violated CWA) Text

Juliana v. U.S., 217 F.Supp.3d 1224 (D. Or. 2016) (Substantive due process protect a fundamental right to a climate system that sustains human life) Text

Sierra Club v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 840 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2016) (EIS sufficiently addressed significant environmental impacts) Text

Oregon Nat. Dessert Ass’n v. Jewell, 840 F.3d 562 (9th Cir. 2016) (BLM failed to comply with NEPA requirements) Text

Pacificans for a Scenic Coast v. California Dept. of Transp., 204 F.Supp.3d 1075 (N.D. Cal. 2016) (Agency had to reinitiate ESA consultation when it learned of increased risk to listed species.) Text

U.S. v. HVI Cat Canyon, Inc., 213 F.Supp.3d 1249 (C.D. Cal. 2016) (Adjoining shorelines within the meaning of CWA includes the edge of intermittent streams) Text

Bhar v. U.S. EPA, 836 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. 2016) (EPA’s approval of certain SIP provisions was contrary to CAA) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 833 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2016) (BLM not required to issue Incidental Take Statements for plants under ESA) Text

Ctr. for Envtl. Health v. McCarthy, 192 F.Supp.3d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2016) (EPA was authorized but not obligated to mandate label disclosure of inert pesticide ingredients under FIFRA) Text

Idaho Conservation League v. Bonneville Power Admin., 826 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir. 2016) (Agency decision to revert to fluctuating winter lake levels did not require EIS under NEPA) Text

Oregon Nat. Desert Ass’n v. Jewell, 823 F.3d 1258 (9th Cir. 2016) (BLM failed to adequately assess baseline numbers of sage grouse present at project site as required by NEPA) Text

Hardeman v. Monsanto Co., 216 F.Supp.3d 1037 (N.D. Cal. 2016) (FIFRA did not preempt consumer claim that pesticide manufacturer’s label failed to adequately warn of dangers) Text

Idaho Wool Growers Ass’n v. Vilsack, 816 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2016) (USFS’s failure to consult with agency when making a decision to reduce domestic sheep grazing was harmless under NEPA) Text

Arizona ex rel. Darwin v. U.S. EPA, 815 F.3d 519 (9th Cir. 2016) (EPA determination that Arizona SIP did not comply with CAA was reasonable) Text

Wildlands v. Woodruff, 151 F.Supp.3d 1153 (W.D. Wash. 2015) (Wildlife Services acted arbitrarily by not preparing EIS for proposed action) Text

ONRC Action v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 798 F.3d 933 (9th Cir. 2015) (CWA permit not required for water flowing into river from human-made channel) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Whitley Mfg. Co., Inc., 145 F.Supp.3d 1054 (W.D. Wash. 2015) (Proof that stormwater contained any particular substance not required to establish CWA violation) Text

Lindberg v. U.S. Forest Serv., 132 F.Supp.3d 1255 (D. Or. 2015) (USFS took “hard look” under NEPA) Text

Cascadia Wildlands v. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 801 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2015) (Aggregation of past and foreseeable future actions in considering cumulative impacts permissible under NEPA) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Lueders, 122 F.Supp.3d 1039 (D. Nev. 2015) (BLM’s environmental assessment contained sufficient discussion of cumulative impacts to satisfy NEPA requirements) Text

California River Watch v. Fluor Corp., 119 F.Supp.3d 1108 (N.D. Cal. 2015) (CERCLA cost recovery action was not time-barred) Text

U.S. v. Roach, 791 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2015) (Business owner subject to criminal liability under RCRA) Text

Building Indus. Ass’n of the Bay Area v. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce, 792 F.3d 1027 (9th Cir. 2015) (NMFS did not have to apply specific methodology when excluding areas from critical habitat under ESA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Montana Snowmobile Ass’n, 790 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. 2015) (EIS failed to comply with NEPA) Text

Oregon Wild v. U.S., 107 F.Supp.3d 1102 (D. Or. 2015) (USFS decision not to prepare EIS was rational) Text

Grand Canyon Trust v. Williams, 98 F.Supp.3d 1044 (D. Ariz. 2015) (Reopening of mining operation did not require new EIS) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. EPA, 90 F.Supp.3d 1177 (W.D. Wash. 2015) (Challenging EPA decision not to identify any water experiencing ocean acidification as impaired under CWA) Text

Cmty. Ass’n for Restoration of the Env’t, Inc. v. Cow Palace, LLC, 80 F.Supp.3d 1180 (E.D. Wash. 2015) (Manure store in commercial dairy’s lagoons was “solid waste” under RCRA) Text

All. for the Wild Rockies v. Austin, 55 F.Supp.3d 1294 (D. Mont. 2014) (USFS did not violated NEPA or NFMA in calculating Canada lynx habitat) Text

Conservation Congress v. Finley, 774 F.3d 611 (9th Cir. 2014) (USFS appropriately considered recovery plan information in assessing logging project’s potential effects on northern spotted owl.) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Skalski, 61 F.Supp.3d 945 (E.D. Cal. 2014) (USFS reasonably concluding no supplemental EIS was needed) Text

Western Watershed Project v. Jewell, 56 F.Supp.3d 1182 (D. Idaho. 2014) (BLM violated NEPA) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. EPA, 65 F.Supp.3d 742 (N.D. Cal. 2014) (EPA duty to consult under ESA triggered by re-registrations of pesticides) Text

Sierra Club. U.S. EPA, 762 F.ed 971 (9th Cir. 2014) (EPA had to apply CAA standards in effect at time of its permitting decision) Text

All. for Wild Rockies v. Bradford, 35 F.Supp.3d 1246 (D. Mont. 2014) (USFS did not violate NEPA, NFMA, or ESA) Text

Idaho Wool Growers Ass’n v. Vilsack, 7 F.Supp.3d 1085 (Agency properly complied with NEPA) Text

Valley, County, Idaho v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 998 F.Supp.2d 919 (D. Idaho) (EIS violated NEPA) Text

Native Fish Soc. v. Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv., 992 F.Supp.2d 1095 (D. Or. 2014) (NMFS violated NEPA by approving a project without preparing an EIS) Text

Hawai’I Wildlife Fund v. Cty. of Maui, 24 F.Supp.3d 980 (D. Haw. 2014) (Failure to obtain NPDES permit violated CWA) Text

Wild Wilderness v. Allen, 12 F.Supp.3d 1309 (D. Or. 2014) (EA prepared pursuant to NEPA considered reasonable range of alternatives) Text

Coppola v. Smith, 982 F.Supp.2d 1133 (E.D. Cal. 2013) (Water systems operator’s operation of well did not establish CERCLA liability) Text

Pace v. Bonham, 5 F.Supp.3d 1127 (N.D. Cal. 2013) (Live fish released into lakes as part of stocking program were not pollutants) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 971 F.Supp.2d 957 (E.D. Cal. 2013) (BLM’s environmental assessment violated NEPA) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Abbey, 719 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2013) (BLM’s environmental assessment violated NEPA) Text

Soda Mountain Wilderness Council v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 945 F.Supp.2d 1162 (D. Or. 2013) (BLM did not violate NEPA) Text

Oceana, Inc. v. Bryson, 940 F.Supp.2d 1029 (N.D. Cal. 2013) (NMFS was not required under NEPA to conduct EIS) Text

Cascadia Wildlands v. U.S. Forest Serv., 937 F.Supp.2d 1271 (D. Or. 2013) (NEPA required that USFS prepare EIS for logging project) Text

Central Sierra Envtl. Res. Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 916 F.Supp.2d 1078 (E.D. Cal. 2013) (EIS prepared by USFS complied with NEPA) Text

California Dump Truck Owners Ass’n v. Nichols, 924 F.Supp.2d 1126 (E.D. Cal. 2012) (EPA’s approval of CAA state implementation plan deprived district court of jurisdiction for preemption challenge to state regulation) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Salazar, 993 F.Supp.2d 1126 (C.D. Cal. 2012) (Final EIS for solar energy project complied with NEPA) Text

Landwatch v. Connaughton, 905 F.Supp.2d 1192 (D Or. 2012) (USFS violated NEPA by failing to take a “hard look” at water diversion project) Text

Native Village of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil, 696 F.3d 849 (9th Cir. 2012) (CAA displaced federal common law claim) Text

League of Wilderness Defenders/Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. U.S. Forest Serv., 883 F.Supp.2d 979 (D. Or. 2012) (USFS’s cumulative impacts analysis violated NEPA) Text

Pacific Rivers Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 689 F.3d 1012 (9th Cir. 2012) (EIS failed to take hard look at consequences to individual fish species) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Jackson, 870 F.Supp.2d 847 (N.D. Cal. 2012) (CAA did not mandate EPA to promulgate additional regulation for ozone following revised NAAQS) Text

Northwest Envtl. Advocates v. U.S. EPA, 855 F.Supp.2d 1199 (D. Or. 2012) (EPA required to review state’s nonpoint source provisions) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Salazar, 843 F.Supp.2d 1105 (D. Idaho 2012) (BLM decision to renew grazing permits violated FLPMA) Text

Ass’n of Irritated Residents v. U.S. EPA, 686 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 2012) (EPA did not have unlimited discretion under CAA to ignore evidence that a state implementation plan might be inadequate) Text

Ctr. for Food Safety v. Vilsack, 844 F.Supp.2d 1006 (N.D. Cal. 2012) (Agency complied with NEPA in deregulating genetically engineered alfalfa) Text

Washington Envtl. Council v. Sturdevant, 834 F.Supp.2d 1209 (W.D. Wash. 2011) (CAA did not prevent state from regulating greenhouse gases) Text

Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals, Ltd., 832 F.Supp.2d (E.D. Wash. 2011) (State of Washington was not liable for clean up costs under CERCLA) Text

Ctr. for Envtl. Law and Policy v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 655 F.3d 1000 (9th Cir. 2011) (Bureau of Reclamation complied with NEPA by adequately discussing cumulative impacts in EIS) Text

Hinds Investments, L.P. v. Angioli, 654 F.3d 846 (9th Cir. 2011) (Owners failed to allege that manufacturers had enough control over hazardous waste to establish RCRA claim) Text

Earth Island Inst. v. Gibson, 834 F.Supp.2d 979 (E.D. Cal. 2011) (USFS complied with NEPA) Text

Center for Food Safety v. Vilsack, No. 10-17719, 2011 WL 676187 (9th Cir. Feb 25, 2011) (organic seed business owners did not demonstrate that herbicide-resistant sugar beets posed likelihood of genetic contamination)

Family Farm Alliance v. Salazar, No. 1:09-CV-01201 OWW, 2010 WL 4323058 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2010) (farmer action against Fish and Wildlife Service regarding threatened Delta smelt)  Text

W. Watersheds Proj. v. Interior Bd. of Land Appeals, No. 09-35708, 2010 WL 3960577 (9th Cir. Oct. 12, 2010) (group challenging grazing permits issued by Bureau of Land Management not eligible for fees under Equal Access to Justice Act)  Text

Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Ctr. v. Grantham, No. 2:10-cv-02350-GEB-CMK, 2010 WL 3958640 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 8, 2010) (challenge to U.S. Forest Service’s Panther Fire Salvage and Reforestation Project)

Alliance for Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 622 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 2010) (preliminary injunction against U.S. Forest Service relating to logging project and timber sales granted)  Text

League of Wilderness Defenders Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Allen, 615 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2010) (use of commercial logging to reduce risk from fire and disease)  Text

Ctr. For Food Safety v. Vilsack, No. C 10-04038, 2010 WL 3835699 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 28, 2010) (motions for intervention in sugar beet matter by Monsanto and Betaseed granted in part; attack on plaintiff’s standing overruled)

Conservation Congress v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. CIV. S-07-2764 LKK/KJM, 2010 WL 3636142 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2010) (challenge to Forest Service’s vegetation management project dismissed)  Text

W. Watersheds Project v. Kraayenbrink, 620 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2010) (challenge to changes in nationwide grazing regulations on federal lands)  Text

City of Emeryville v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1251 (9th Cir. 2010) (action by pesticide manufacturer to enforce settlement involving contamination clean-up)  Text

Hapner v. Tidwell, 621 F.3d 1239 (9th Cir. 2010) (challenge to approval of commercial logging of national forest)  Text

Citizens for Better Forestry v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., No. 08-01927, 2010 WL 3222183 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2010) (alleged violation of Endangered Species Act for promulgations of rules)

N. California River Watch v. Exxon Mobil Corp., No. C 10-0534 PJH, 2010 WL 3184324 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2010) (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act)

W. Watersheds Project v. Rosenkrance, No. CV 09-365-E-BLW, 2010 WL 3522244 (D. Idaho July 29, 2010) (issuance of grazing permit by BLM was arbitrary and capricious)  Text

Grand Canyon Trust v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, CV-07-8164-PHX-DGC, 2010 WL 2643537 (D. Ariz. June 29, 2010) (Endangered Species Act)  Text

Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Goldstene, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 2490999 (E.D. Cal. 2010) (challenge to Global Warming Solutions Act)  Text

Oregon Natural Desert Ass’n v. Tidwell, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 2246419 (D. Or. 2010) (challenge under the ESA and NFMA for grazing permits)  Text

Adam Bros. Farming, Inc. v. County of Santa Barbara, 604 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2010) (challenge to wetland delineation as a taking)  Text

Ctr. For Biological Diversity v. E.P.A., No. C07-02794 JCS, 2010 WL 2143658 (N.D. Cal. May 17, 2010) (pesticide did not have an effects determination under Endangered Species Act)

Western Watersheds Project v. U.S. Forest Service, No. 09-0629-E-BLW, 2010 WL 1816254 (D. Idaho May 04, 2010) (failure to follow NEPA for noxious weeds and global warming)  Text

Wild Fish Conservancy v. EPA, No. C08-0156-JCC, 2010 WL 1734850 (W.D. Wash. April 28, 2010) (challenge to state regulations exempting salmon farms)  Text

Native Ecosystems Council v. Tidwell, — F.3d —, 2010 WL 843761 (9th Cir. 2010) (failure to comply with NEPA in updating grazing allotments)  Text

Sierra Club v. Johnson, No. C 08-01409 WHA, 2010 WL 147951 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2010) (attorneys fees under CERCLA)

Glasser Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv., No. 08-35764, 2009 WL 5184208 (9th Cir. Dec. 28, 2009) (incidental take permit for salmon hatchery)  Text

Family Farm Alliance v. Salazar, Nos. 1:09-CV-00407 OWW DLB, 1:09-CV-01201 OWW DLB, 2009 WL 4716050 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2009) (biological opinion under ESA)

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Lubchenco, No. C-09-4087 EDL, 2009 WL 4545169 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2009) (listing animal under ESA)

In re Delta Smelt Consol. Cases, — F.Supp.2d —, 2009 WL 3823934 (E.D. Cal. 2009) (biological opinion for delta smelt)  Text

In re Delta Smelt Consolidated Cases, 663 F.Supp.2d 922 (E.D. Cal. 2009) (ESA standing)  Text

Cent. Delta Water Agency v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 653 F.Supp.2d 1066 (E.D. Cal. 2009) (standing to bring NEPA claim)  Text

California ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 575 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2009) (NEPA economic analysis and ESA consultation required before removing roadless rule in national forests)  Text

Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Larson, 641 F.Supp.2d 1120 (D. Idaho 2009) (No violations of NEPA in allowing phosphate mining to expand)  Text

Citizens for Better Forestry v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 632 F.Supp.2d 968, 2009 WL 1883728 (violation of NEPA and ESA in promulgating forest management plans)  Text

Ctr. For Biological Diversity v. Wagner, No. 08-302-CL, 2009 WL 2176049 (D. Or. June 20, 2009) (claim that decision to allow grazing violated NEPA)

Geertson Seed Farms v. Johanns, 570 F.3d 1130, (9th Cir. 2009) (upholding injunction for not complying with NEPA)  Text

Ctr. For Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 623 F.Supp.2d 1044 (N.D. Cal. 2009) (violations of the ESA)  Text

Grand Canyon Trust v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 623 F.Supp.2d 1015 (D. Ariz. 2009) (operation of dam does not violated the ESA)  Text

Wildearth Guardians v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., No. 2:07-cv-00837 CW, 2009 WL 1078600 (D. Utah Apr. 22, 2009) (challenging permit to take endangered prairie dogs)  Text

Adams v. United States, No. 03-0049-E-BLW, 2009 WL 1034762 (D. Idaho Apr. 16, 2009) (testimony on compliance with NEPA)   Text

W. Watersheds Project v. Dryer, Nos. CV-04-181-S-BLW, CV-02-521-S-BLW, 2009 WL 484438 (D. Idaho Feb. 26, 2009) (grazing permits; Endangered Species Act violations)

Sierra Forest Legacy v. U.S. Forest Serv., 598 F.Supp.2d 1058 (N.D. Cal. 2009) (claim management plan violated NEPA and ESA)  Text

Bark v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., No. CV 07-1536-MO, 2009 WL 279087 (D. Or. Feb. 5, 2009) (no NEPA violations by BLM in opening up area for logging)  Text

Alliance for Wild Rockies v. Kimbell, No. 06-36013, 2009 WL 141376 (9th Cir. Jan. 21, 2009) (no violation of NEPA)

Silver Dollar Grazing Ass’n v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., No. 07-35612, 2009 WL 166924 (9th Cir. Jan. 13, 2009) (grazing management plan did not violate NEPA)

Cent. Mont. Wildlands Ass’n v. Kimball, No. 06-35938, 2009 WL 117851 (9th Cir. Jan. 9, 2009) (no violations of NEPA by Forest Service)

League of Wilderness Defenders v. U.S. Forest Serv., 549 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 2008) (NEPA violation in approving selective logging program)  Text

Citizens for Better Forestry v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., Nos. C 05-1144 PJH, C 04-4512 PJH, 2008 WL 5210945 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 11, 2008) (attorney’s fees under ESA)

Greater Yellowstone Coal. v. Timchak, No. CV-08-388-E-MHW, 2008 WL 4911410 (D. Idaho Nov. 13, 2008) (violations of NEPA in expansion of phosphorus mine)  Text

Western Watersheds Projects v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. C 08-1460 PJH, 2008 WL 2952837 (N.D. Cal. July 30, 2008) (denial of intervention; NEPA violations in grazing permits)

Our Children’s Earth Found. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 527 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2008) (technology based standards)   Text

Cloud Found., Inc. v. Kempthrone, 546 F.Supp.2d 1003 (D. Mont. 2008) (statute of limitations to challenge forest plant; no violations of Wild Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act)  Text

W. Watersheds Project v. Kraayenbrink, 538 F.Supp.2d 1302 (D. Idaho 2008) (violations of NEPA and ESA in grazing permit regulations)  Text

Ariz. Cattle Growers’ Ass’n v. Kempthorne, 534 F.Supp.2d 1013 (D. Ariz. 2008) (designation federal land as critical habitat under the ESA)  Text

Ass’n of Irritated Residents v. Fred Schakel Dairy, No. 1:05-CV-00707, 2008 WL 850136 (E.D. Cal. 2008) (motion to dismiss CAA challenge to dairy)

Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. 07-634-AS, 2008 WL 140657 (D. Or. 2008) (grazing runoff is not a point source)   Text

Idaho Watersheds Project v. Jones, 253 Fed.Appx. 684 (9th Cir. 2007) (water diversion and the ESA)

Center For Food Safety v. Johanns, Civ. No. 03-00621 JMS/BMK, 2007 WL 3072860 (D.Hawai’i, 2007) (attorney’s fees under ESA in biotech case)

Stevens County v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 507 F.Supp.2d 1127 (E.D. Wash. 2007) (NEPA did not require issuance of EIS)  Text

Ventana Wilderness Alliance v. Bradford, No. C 06-5472 PJH, 2007 WL 1848042 (N.D. Cal. June 27, 2007) (no violations of NEPA in allowing grazing)  Text

W. Watersheds Project v. Kraayenbrink, Nos. CV-05-297-E-BLW, CV-06-275-E-BLW, 2007 WL 1667618 (D. Idaho June 8, 2007) (new grazing regulations violated NEPA and ESA)  Text

Ctr. For Food Safety v. Johanns, CV. No. 03-00621 JMS-BMK, 2007 WL 3072863 (D.Hawai’i, 2007) (Field testing of GMOs and compliance with ESA and NEPA)

Ass’n of Irritated Residents v. C&R Vanderham Dairy, No. 1:05-CV-01593 OWW SMS, 2007 WL 2815038 (E.D. Cal. 2007) (dairy regulation under the CAA and California state law).

Coldani v. Hamm, No. Civ S-07-660, 2007 WL 2345016 (E.D. Cal. 2007) (CWA citizen suit requirements, navigable waters)

Bowoto v. Chevron Corp. No. C 99-02506 SI, 2007 WL 2349336 (N.D.Cal. 2007) (International environmental law)

City of Los Angeles v. County of Kern, 509 F.Supp.2d 865 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (no preemption of local bans on land applications of biosolids)   Text

Lindner v. Meadow Gold Dairies, Inc., 515 F.Supp.2d 1154 (D. Haw. 2007) (complying with the CWA did not frustrate a lease)  Text

N. Cal. River Watch v. City of Healdsburg, 496 F.3d 993 (9th Cir. 2007) (significant nexus to navigable waters)   Text

U.S. v. Moses, 496 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2007) (water of the United States, what is a discharge)  Text

San Francisco Baykeeper v. Cargill Salt Div., 481 F.3d 700 (9th Cir. 2007) (waters of the United States)  Text

Geertson Seed Farms v. Johanns, No. C 06-01075 CRB, 2007 WL 518624 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (GMO crop as “significant environmental impact” under the ESA)   Text

Envtl. Prot. Info. Ctr. v. Pac. Lumber Co., 469 F.Supp.2d 803 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (discharge, point source, navigable waters)   Text

Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. 07-634-AS, 2007 WL 140657 (D. Or. Jan. 10, 2007) (grazing runoff is not a point source)  Text

Physicians Comm. for Responsible Medicine v. EPA, No. C 05-04093 CRB, 2006 WL 3000657 (N.D. Cal. 2006)(challenge to EPA program)   Text

Chem. Producers & Distrib. Ass’n v. Helliker, 463 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. 2006) (pesticide registration)   Text

Wash. Toxics Coal. v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 457 F.Supp. 2d 1158 (W.D. Wash. 2006) (challenge to FWS and NMFS regulations)   Text

Geertson Farms, Inc. v. Johanns, 439 F. Supp. 2d 1012 (N.D. Cal. 2006) (ESA claim re: pesticide used on GMO hay)   Text

Forest Guardians v. Johanns, 450 F.3d 455 (9th Cir. 2006) (agency did not re-initiate consultations under ESA to grazing allotments)  Text

W. Watersheds Project v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. CV-05-189-E-BLW, 2006 WL 1697181 (D. Idaho June 12, 2006) (permanent injunction to prevent further grazing on allotments till supplemental EIS done)

Ass’n of Irritated Residents v. Fred Schakel Dairy, 2005 WL 3299508 (E.D.Cal. 2005) (administrative procedures)   Text

Baccarat Fremont Developers, LLC v. U.S. Army Corps Eng’rs, 425 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. 2005) (jurisdiction over wetlands)   Text

City of Livingston v. Dow Chem. Co., No. C 05-03262 JSW, 2005 WL 2463916 (N.D. Cal. 2005) (removal to federal court on water contamination claim)

City of Oceanside v. Dow Chem. Co., No. C 05-02482 JSW, 2005 WL 2463917 (N.D. Cal. 2005) (removal to federal court on water contamination claim)

Montara Water & Sanitary Dist., No. C 05-02480 JSW, 2005 WL 2463918 (N.D. Cal. 2005) (removal to federal court on water contamination claim)

City of Alhambra v. Dow Chem. Co., No. C 05-02595 JSW, 2005 WL 2463952 (N.D. Cal. 2005) (removal to federal court on water contamination claim)

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Leavitt, No. C 02-01580JSW, 2005 WL 2277030 (N.D. Cal. 2005) (ESA citizen suit)

Fairhurst v. Hagener, 422 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2005) (application of pesticide)   Text

Adams v. United States, 420 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2005) (herbicide drift)   Text

W. Watersheds Project v. Bennett, 392 F.Supp.2d 1217 (D. Idaho 2005) (violations of NEPA in issuing grazing permits)  Text

Washington Toxics Coalition v. Environmental Protection Agency, 413 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2005). (EIS regarding pesticides)   Text

Forest Guardians v. Veneman, 392 F.Supp.2d 1082 (D. Ariz. 2005) (challenging biological opinion under the ESA)  Text

Ctr. for Food Safety v. Veneman, 364 F.Supp.2d 1202 (D.Hawai’I 2005) (GMO effect under ESA)   Text

United States v. Adam Bros. Farming, Inc., No. CV-00-7409 CAS (RNBx), 2005 WL 5957827 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2005) (control of discharges in waters of the U.S.)

Davidson v. Arch Chem. Specialty Prod., Inc., 347 F.Supp. 2d 938 (D.Or. 2004) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Wash. Toxics Coal. v. EPA, 357 F.Supp. 2d 1266 (W.D. Wash. 2004) (challenge to EPA committee)   Text

United States v. Adam Bros. Farming, Inc., 369 F.Supp.2d 1180 (C.D. Cal. 2004) (jurisdiction of the CWA)   Text

Chem. Producers & Distrib. Ass’n v. Helliker, No. CV 02-9781 AHM, 2004 WL 1490376 (C.D. Cal. 2004) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Vanderzanden Farms, L.L.C. v. Dow Agrosciences, L.L.C., 323 F.Supp. 2d 1075 (D. Or. 2004) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Chem. Producers & Distrib. Ass’n v. Helliker, 319 F.Supp. 2d 1116 (C.D. Cal. 2004)(FIFRA preemption)   Text

United States v. Phillips, 367 F.3d 846 (9th Cir. 2004) (navigability of waters)   Text

Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., 312 F.Supp.2d 1337 (D. Or. 2004) (duty to manage livestock grazing within wild and scenic river corridors with forest plan standards)  Text

United States v. Adam Bros. Farming, Inc., 369 F.Supp.2d 1166 (C.D. Cal. 2003) (jurisdiction of the CWA)  Text

Forest Guardians v. Veneman, 305 F.Supp.2d 1118 (D. Ariz. 2003) (10-year grazing permits should not have been based on three-year environmental impact studies)  Text

Envtl. Def. Ctr., Inc. v. U.S. EPA, 344 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1085 (2004) (review of discharge regulations)   Text

Friends of Wild Swan v. U.S. EPA, 74 F. App’x 718 (9th Cir. 2003) (review of state’s TMDLs for water quality limited segments)

Akee v. Dow Chem. Co., 272 F.Supp. 2d 1112 (D.Haw. 2003) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

City of Arcadia v. U.S. EPA, 265 F.Supp.2d 1142 (N.D. Cal. 2003) (approval of state-submitted TMDLs)   Text

N. Plains Res. Council v. Fid. Exploration & Dev. Co., 325 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2003) (invalidating state created CWA permit exemption)   Text

Nw. Envtl. Advocates v. U.S. EPA, 268 F.Supp.2d 1255 (D. Or. 2003) (review of water quality standards and antidegradation plan)  Text

Center for Biological Diversity v. Norton, 240 F.Supp.2d 1090 (D. Ariz. 2003) (adequacy of critical habitat designation)  Text

Hiebenthal v. Meduri Farms, No. 02-664-AS, 2002 WL 31971590 (D. Or. 2002) (CWA)   Text

League of Wilderness Defenders/Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Forsgren, 309 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2002) (citizen suit under NEPA and CWA)  Text

Hiebenthal v. Meduri Farms, 242 F. Supp. 2d 885 (D. Or. 2002) (jurisdiction)   Text

Idaho Watersheds Project v. Hahn, 307 F.3d 815 (9th Cir. 2002) (injunction requiring grazing permits to conform with NEPA)  Text

Cmty. Ass’n for Restoration of Environ. v. Henry Bosma, 305 F.3d 943 (9th Cir. 2002) (CWA, dairy)   Text

United States v. New Portland Meadows, Inc., Civil No. 00-507-AS, 2002 WL 31180956 (D.Or. 2002) (discharge of pollutants from horse racetrack facility)

Ass’n to Protect Hammersley, Eld, & Totten Inlets v. Taylor Res., Inc., 299 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2002) (CWA challenge against shellfish producer)   Text

San Francisco BayKeeper v. Whitman, 297 F.3d 877 (9th Cir. 2002) (review of state submitted TMDLs)   Text

Wash. Toxics Coal. v. EPA, No. C01-132C, 2002 WL 34213031 (W.D. Wash. 2002) (ESA)

Pronsolino v. Nastri, 291 F.3d 1123 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 926 (2003) (TMDL authority)  Text

Cal. Sportfishing Prot. Alliance v. Diablo Grande, Inc., 209 F.Supp.2d 1059 (E.D. Cal. 2002) (standing, navigable water, discharge)   Text

Borden Ranch P’ship v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 261 F.3d 810 (9th Cir. 2001), aff’d by an equally divided court, 537 U.S. 99 (2002) (normal farming exemption to § 404, recapture provision)  Text

Nathan Kimmel, Inc. v. DowElanco, 275 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2002)(FIFRA preemption)  Text


 

TENTH CIRCUIT

Wild Watershed v. Hurlocker, 393 F.Supp.3d 1086 (D. N.M. 2019) (USFS did not trigger NEPA review) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Conner, 920 F.3d 1245 (10th Cir. 2019) (USFS did not violate NEPA in concluding that an EIS was not required) Text

Citizens for a Healthy Cmty. v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 377 F.supp.3d 1223 (D. Colo. 2019) (BLM and USFS complied with NEPA by taking a hard look at cumulative climate change impacts of proposed project) Text

Front Range Nesting Bald Eagle Studies v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 353 F.Supp.3d 1115 (D. Colo. 2018) (FWS did not impermissibly preordain the outcome of its NEPA analysis) Text

Wilderness Workshop v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 342 F.Supp.3d 1145 (D. Colo. 2018) (BLM violated NEPA by failing to assess indirect environmental effects of oil and gas leases) Text

Colorado v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 362 F.Supp.3d 951 (D. Colo. 2018) (FWS did not violate NEPA in making critical habitat designation for the Gunnison sage-grouse) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Christiansen, 348 F.Supp.3d 1204 (D. Wyo. 2018) (USFS violated NEPA by failing to examine a reasonable range of alternatives in its EIS) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 322 F.Supp.3d 1134 (D. Colo. 2018) (BLM’s conformity analysis did not violate CAA) Text

Dine Citizens Against Ruining our Env’t v. Jewell, 312 F.Supp.3d 1031 (D. N.M. 2018) (BLM’s approval of over 300 applications for permits to drill did not violate NEPA) Text

Benham v. Ozark Materials River Rock, LLC, 885 F.3d 1267 (10th Cir. 2018) (District court did not err in finding that mining company discharged without CWA permit) Text

New Mexico v. U.S. EPA, 310 F.Supp.3d 1230 (D. N.M. 2018) (Claim adequately stated against government contractor for operator liability under CERCLA) Text

Jarita Mesa Livestock Grazing Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., 301 F.Supp.3d 1010 (D. N.M. 2017) (USFS’ failure to consider non-environmental socioeconomic impacts in environmental analysis did not violate NEPA) Text

Grand Canyon Trust v. Energy Fuels Res. (U.S.A.) Inc., 269 F.Supp.3d 1173 (Construction of evaporation pond at uranium mill did not violate CAA regulations) Text

Schoenhofer v. McClaskey, 861 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2017) (Kansas regulation requiring application of pesticide in preconstruction areas was not preempted by FIFRA) Text

Western Watershed Project v. Jewell, 221 F.Supp.3d 1308 (D. Utah 2016) (NPS did not violate NEPA in categorically excluding grazing permit from environmental analysis) Text

Rocky Mountain Wild v. Walsh, 216 F.Supp.3d 1234 (D. Colo. 2016) (Decision not to list wildflowers as threatened under the ESA based on a 15-year conservation agreement was arbitrary and capricious.) Text

Cure Land, LLC v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 833 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2016) (Agency failure to explain removal of target zone component of river conservation program from NEPA analysis was not arbitrary and capricious) Text

Utah Physicians for a Healthy Env’t v. Kennecott Utah Copper, LLC, 191 F.Supp.3d 1287 (D. Utah 2016) (EPA approval in addition to state approval was not required to allow increased copper mining in Utah under CAA) Text

Jarita Mesa Livestock Grazing Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., 140 F.Supp.3d 1123 (D. N.M. 2015) (Challenging USFS’s decision to reduce the number of grazing permits in a national forest under NEPA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Serv., 120 F.Supp.3d 1237 (D. Wyo. 2015) (Final EIS took hard look at impacts of project on climate change as required by NEPA) Text

U.S. v. Richter, 796 F.3d 1173 (10th Cir. 2015) (Definition of “waste” in Colorado hazardous waste regulation was consistent with definition under RCRA regulations) Text

Rags Over the Arkansas River, Inc. v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 77 F.Supp.3d 1038 (D. Colo. 2015) (BLM complied with NEPA in its consideration of project’s impact on bighorn sheep population) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. EPA, 770 F.3d 919 (10th Cir. 2014) (EPA’s approval of cap-and-trade program for regulating sulfur dioxide emissions did not violate CAA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. E.P.A., 759 F.3d 1196 (10th Cir. 2014) (EPA had no duty to consult with FWS about effect of emissions on endangered fish near power plant.) Text

Western Watersheds Project v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 721 F.3d 1264 (BLM complied with NEPA’s hard look requirement in granting 10-year grazing permit) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. EPA, 728 F.3d 1075 (10th Cir. 2013) (Notice of violation did not demonstrate utility’s noncompliance with CAA) Text

Oklahoma v. U.S. EPA, 723 F.3d 1201 (10th Cir. 2013) (EPA properly rejected state implementation plans for failure to comply with CAA guidelines) Text

U.S. v. Hamilton, 952 F.Supp.2d 1271 (D. Wyo. 2013) (Creek was a WOTUS) Text

Moyle Petroleum v. LaHood, 969 F.Supp.2d 1332 (D. Utah 2013) (Commercial property owner lacked standing to pursue claims for procedural violations of NEPA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Lamar Utilities Bd., 932 F.Supp.2d 1237 (D. Colo. 2013) (Electric utility’s steam-generating unit was a major source polluter for purposes of the CAA) Text

Town of Superior v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 913 F.Supp.2d 1087 (D. Colo. 2012) (Reliance by FWS on non-NEPA study related to radiation exposure that was conducted pursuant to CERCLA standards satisfied NEPA requirements) Text

US Magnesium, LLC v. U.S. EPA, 690 F.3d 1157 (10th Cir. 2012) (EPA’s interpretation of CAA provision relating to state implementation plan was reasonable) Text

Colorado Envtl. Coal. v. Salazar, 875 F.Supp.2d 1233 (D. Colo. 2012) (BLM failed to consider alternatives under NEPA) Text

Colorado Tr. For Prot. & Benefits v. Souder, Miller & Associates, Inc., 870 F.Supp.2d 1173 (D. Colo. 2012) (Drilling did not discharge contaminants into WOTUS) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Serv., 828 F.Supp.2d 1223 (D. Colo. 2011) (USFS failed to consider reasonable alternatives in NEPA analysis) Text

United States v. Questar Gas Mgmt., No. 2:09CV167DAK, 2010 WL 3952016 (D. Utah Oct. 8, 2010) (right to intervene in a Clean Air Act action commenced by the United States)  Text

Oklahoma ex rel. Edmondson v. Tyson Foods, 619 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2010) (denial of intervention by Indian tribe into CERCLA action for poultry waste disposal)  Text

Wyoming State Snowmobile Ass’n v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., No. 09-cv-00095, 2010 WL 3743933 (D. Wyo. Sept. 10, 2010) (challenge to revised designation of critical habitat for Canada lynx)

Forest Guardians v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 611 F.3d 692 (10th Cir. 2010) (Endangered Species Act)  Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Nat’l Park Serv., 604 F.3d 1192 (10th Cir. 2010) (challenge to proposal to reduce elk populations)  Text

San Juan Citizens Alliance v. Stiles, No. 08-cv-00144-RPM, 2010 WL 1780816 (D. Colo. May 03, 2010) (NEPA challenge)  Text

Ctr. For Native Ecosystems v. Salazar, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 1961740 (D. Colo. 2010) (de-listing of an endangered species)  Text

Colorado Wild v. Vilsack, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 1257988 (D. Colo. 2010) (NEPA action against proposed sale of timber in a nation forest)  Text

Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Bureau of Reclamation, 601 F.3d 1096 (Tenth Circuit 2010) (challenge under the Endangered Species Act)  Text

Oklahoma v. Tyson Foods, Inc., No. 05-CV-0329-GKF-PJC, 2010 WL 653032 (N.D. Okla. Feb. 17, 2010) (poultry litter litigation; litter not a nuisance per se)

Oklahoma v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 262 F.R.D. 617 (N.D. Okla. 2009) (poultry waste litigation; claim Cargill withheld evidence)  Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Salazar, No. CV-09-00574-PHX-FJM, 2009 WL 4270039 (D. Ariz. Nov. 25, 2009) (listing of prairie dogs under ESA)  Text

Wildearth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Serv., 668 F.Supp.2d 1314 (D.N.M. 2009) (violations of NEPA; opening federal lands to grazing)  Text

Oklahoma v. Tyson Foods, Inc., No. 05-CV-329-GKF-PJC, 2009 WL 2252129 (N.D. Okla. July 24, 2009) (motion to strike certain expert witnesses in poultry litter litigation)  Text

Oklahoma v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 258 F.R.D 472, (N.D. Okla. 2009) (dismissal of damages in claims of watershed contamination)  Text

Greater Yellowstone Coal. v. Tidwell, 572 F.3d 1115 (10th Cir. 2009) (environmental analysis not required for elk program)  Text

Attorney Gen. of Okla. v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 565 F.3d 769 (10th Cir. 2009) (upholding denial of injunction to stop application of poultry waste in watershed)  Text

W. Org. of Res. Councils v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 591 F.Supp.2d 1206 (D. Wyo. 2008) (BLM properly followed NEPA)  Text

Chihuahuan Grasslands Alliance v. Kempthorne, No. 07-2183, 2008 WL 4542310 (10th Cir. 2008) (violations of NEPA in leasing federal lands)  Text

Edmondson v. Tyson Foods, Inc., No. 05-CV-329-GKF-SAJ, 2008 WL 4453098 (N.D. Okla. Sept. 29, 2008) (denial of injunction to stop application of poultry litter)  Text

Ctr. For Native Ecosystems v. Cables, 509 F.3d 1310 (10th Cir. 2007) (livestock grazing violations under ESA, CWA)  Text

Oklahoma ex rel Edmondson v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 05-CV-329-GKF-SAJ, 2007 WL 4027646 (N.D. Okla. 2007). (poultry waste in Illinois River watershed; discovery order)

Kersenbrock v. Stoneman Cattle Co., LLC, 2007 WL 2219288 (D.Kan. 2007) (citizen suit under the CWA)  Text

Karr v. Hefner, 475 F.3d 1192 (10th Cir. 2007) (diligent prosecution by EPA, adequacy of notice letter)  Text

Or. Nat’l Res. Council v. Hallock, Civil No. 02-1650-CO, 2006 WL 1142223 (D.Or. 2006)(ESA, NPDES permit)

U.S. v. Hubenka, 438 F.3d 1026 (10th Cir. 2006) (tributary rule, dredge and fill by irrigation district)  Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. EPA, 415 F.3d 1121 (10th Cir. 2005) (review of state water quality standards)   Text

Pound v. Airosol Co., 368 F.Supp. 2d 1161 (D.Kan. 2005) (CAA, citizen suit)  Text

Sierra Club v. Seaboard Farms Inc., 387 F.3d 1167 (10th Cir. 2004) (definition of “facility” under CERCLA)   Text

Pound v. Airosol Co., 316 F.Supp. 2d 1079 (D. Kan. 2004) (CAA, citizen suit)  Text

Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Keys, 333 F.3d 1109 (10th Cir. 2003) (consequences of species designation)(vacated on procedural grounds by Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Keys, 355 F.3d 1215 (10th Cir. 2004))  Text

Swartz v. Beach, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1239 (D. Wyo. 2002) (CWA violations, takings issues)  Text

Middle Rio Grande Conservancy Dist. v. Norton, 294 F.3d 1220 (10th Cir. 2002) (challenge to species designation under ESA) (upholding Middle Rio Grande Conservancy Dist. v. Babbitt, 206 F.Supp.2d 1156 (D. N.M. 2000))  Text

Anderson v. Dow Agrosciences, L.L.C., 262 F.Supp.2d 1280 (W.D. Okla. 2003) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Sierra Club v. Seaboard Farms, Inc., 2002 WL 32443305 (W.D. Okla. 2002) (CERCLA)

New Mexico Cattle Growers Ass’n v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 248 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. 2001) (challenge to critical habitat designation)   Text

Middle Rio Grande Conservancy Dist. v. Babbitt, 206 F.Supp.2d 1156 (D. N.M 2000)(challenge to species designation under ESA)  Text

Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation v. Babbitt, 199 F.3d 1224 (10th Cir. 2000) (wolf reintroduction)   Text


 

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

Cahaba Riverkeeper v. U.S. EPA, 938 F.3d 1157 911th Cir. 2019) (EPA did not abuse its discretion under the CWA) Text

Georgia v. Wheeler, No. 2:15-CV-00079, 2019 WL 3949922 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 21, 2019) (Invalidating the 2015 WOTUS rule) Text

Altamaha Riverkeeper v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 355 F.Supp.3d 1181 (S.D. Ga. 2018) (Corps adequately analyzed alternatives as required by CWA) Text

Sierra Club, Inc. v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 320 F.Supp.3d 1298 (M.D. Fla. 2018) (Corps did not violate CWA by permitting conversion of wetland mitigation bank) Text

Georgia v. Pruitt, 326 F.Supp.3d 1356 (S.D. Ga. 2018) (Preliminary injunction warranted against enforcement of WOTUS rule) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council v. Nat. Park Serv., 250 F.Supp.3d 1260 (M.D. Fla. 2017) (NPS took a sufficiently “hard look” at adverse impacts of project under NEPA) Text

Arnold v. U.S. Pipe & Foundry Co., LLC, 274 F.Supp.3d 1272 (N.D. Ala. 2017) (CERCLA discovery rule did not extend statute of limitations in toxic tort action) Text

Tennessee Riverkeeper, Inc. v. 3M Co., 234 F.Supp.3d 1153 (N.D. Ala. 2017) (Plaintiffs adequately pled that discharges from wastewater treatment plant constituted “solid waste” under RCRA) Text

Gulf Restoration Network v. Jewell, 161 F.Supp.3d 1119 (S.D. Ala. 2016) (Agencies failed to consider reasonable alternatives in NEPA analysis) Text

City of Eufaula, Ala. V. Alabama Dep’t of Transp., 71 F.Supp.3d 1272 (M.D. Ala. 2014) (State road-widening project was not subject to NEPA’s procedural protections) Text

Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 46 F.Supp.3d 1254 (M.D. Fla. 2014) (NPS took required “hard look” at project impacts under NEPA) Text

Alabama Envtl. Council v. Adm’r, U.S. EPA, 711 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir. 2013) (EPA did not satisfy procedural requirements for invoking CAA’s error-correction mechanism to revise previously approved SIP) Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Dept. of Navy, 895 F.Supp.2d 1285 (11th Cir. 2012) (The ESA did not require NMFS to include an incidental take statement for a portion of its biological opinion.) Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. Salazar, 877 F.Supp.2d 1271 (M.D. Fla. 2012) (Agency decision was arbitrary and capricious under NEPA) Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Mgmt., 684 F.3d 1242 (11th Cir. 2012) (BOEM appropriately summarized potential project impacts in NEPA analysis) Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Mgmt., Regulation, Enf’t, 871 F.Supp.2d 1312 (S.D. Ala. 2012) (BOEM did not violate NEPA by approving lease sale bids after oil spill) Text

Florida Wildlife Fed’n, Inc. v. Jackson, 853 F.Supp.2d 1138 (N.D. Fla. 2012) (Determination that numeric nutrient standard was needed was not arbitrary or capricious) Text

Gates v. W.R. Grace & Co., No. 8:08-cv-2560-T-27TBM, 2009 WL 1455316 (M.D. Fla. May 21, 2009) (liability for contamination to neighbor’s land by fertilizer plant)  Text

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. United States, 566 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2009) (challenging biological opinion done under the ESA)  Text

Griffin Indus., Inc. v. Irvin, 496 F.3d 1189 (11th Cir. 2007) (civil rights suit; requiring two competitors to follow different regulations)   Text

Sierra Club, Inc. v. Leavitt, 488 F.3d 904 (11th Cir. 2007) (state’s impaired waters list)   Text

Bayer CropScience, LP v. Booth, No. Civ.A. 7:04-CV-92, 2005 WL 2138759 (M.D. Ga. 2005) (FIFRA preemption)

Booth v. Bd. of Regents, No. Civ.A. 7:05-CV-34, 2005 WL 2099246 (M.D. Ga. 2005) (FIFRA preemption)

Sierra Club v. U.S. EPA, 377 F.Supp.2d 1205 (N.D. Fla. 2005) (EPA’s review of state’s NPDES authorization)  Text

Fla. Pub. Interest Research Group Citizen Lobby, Inc. v. EPA, 386 F.3d 1070 (11th Cir. 2004) (review of state’s impaired waters list)  Text

Oken v. Monsanto Co., 371 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 2004) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Sierra Club v. Hankinson, 351 F.3d 1358 (11th Cir. 2003) (awarding attorney’s fees for citizen suit)  Text

Oken v. Monsanto Co., 218 F.Supp. 2d 1361 (S.D. Fla. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)  Text

Fishermen Against Destruction v. Closter Farms, 300 F.3d 1294 (11th Cir.2002) (CWA)   Text

Sierra Club v. Meiburg, 296 F.3d 1021 (11th Cir. 2002) (TMDL standards, abuse of court’s discretion)  Text


 

D.C. CIRCUIT

State of Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 f.3d 303 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (EPA’s failure to require upwind states to eliminate their contributions to downwind pollution by statutory deadline violated CAA’s good neighbor rule) Text

American Fuel and Petrochemical Mfrs. v. EPA, 937 F.3d 559 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (EPA did not violate CAA in taking cost considerations into account in deciding to exercise its full cellulosic waiver authority) Text

Anacostia Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Wheeler, No. 16-CV-1651 (CRC), 2019 WL 3803639 (D. D.C. Aug. 12, 2019) (EPA erred in approving TMDLs) Text

Idaho Conservation League v Wheeler, 930 F.3d 494 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (EPA’s interpretation of CERCLA provision was entitled to deference) Text

California Cmtys. Against Toxics v. EPA, 928 F.3d 1041 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (EPA’s determination that legitimate recycling of hazardous materials did not constitute “discard” of such materials under RCRA was reasonable) Text

New York v. EPA, 921 F.3d 257 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (EPA did not abuse its discretion under CAA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Zinke, 368 F.Supp.3d 41 (D. D.C. 2019) (BLM could not defer its NEPA analysis) Text

Sierra Club v. Wheeler, 330 F.Supp.3d 407 (D. D.C. 2018) (CAA does not impose a certain deadline for EPA to develop a federal implementation plan for solid waste incinerators) Text

Util. Solid Waste Activities Grp. V. EPA, 901 F.3d 414 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (RCRA provision governing regulation of open dumps permits EPA to regulate in active sites) Text

Air All. Houston v. EPA, 906 F.3d 1049 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (EPA did not have authority to promulgate rule delaying implementation of rule amending CAA regulations) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council v. EPA, 896 F.3d 459 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (EPA’s rule interpreting CAA provision was reasonable) Text

American Rivers v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 895 F.3d 32 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (FERC’s determination that project would have no significant impacts violated NEPA) Text

Nat’l Envtl. Dev. Ass’n’s Clean Air Proj. v. EPA, 891 F.3d 1041 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (EPA impermissibly interpreted CAA’s uniformity obligation) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council, Inc. v. EPA, 301 F.Supp.3d 133 (D. D.C. 2018) (Trash pollution plan violated CWA) Text

Util. Air Regulatory Grp. V. EPA, 885 F.3d 714 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (EPA’s amendment to CAA regional haze rule was reasonable) Text

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 301 F.Supp.3d 50 (D. D.C. 2018) (Agencies did not violate NEPA’s anti-segmentation principle) Text

Mayo v. Reynolds, 875 F.3d 11 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (NPS not required to prepare new NEPA analysis for each year of 15-year plan) Text

Alaska v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 273 F.Supp.3d (D. D.C. 2017) (USDA’s prupose and need statement for Roadless Area Conservation Rule did not violate NEPA’s rule of reason) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy, 867 F.3d 189 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (Department of Energy did not violate NEPA in assessing application to export liquified natural gas) Text

Gov’t of Province of Manitoba v. Zinke, 273 F.Supp.3d 145 (D. D.C. 2017) (NEPA analysis for project adequately considered impact of climate change-induced increases in turbidity of intake water) Text

Clean Air Council v. Pruitt, 862 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (CAA did not authorize EPA to stay, pending reconsideration, final methane rule’s provision regulating low-production wells) Text

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 255 F.Supp.3d 101 (D. D.C. 2017) (Corps took requisite “hard look” at project risks under NEPA) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Zinke, 260 F.Supp.3d 11 (D. D.C. 2017) (Department of Interior did not have mandatory duty to complete review of its NEPA procedures for offshore oil and gas exploration) Text

Waterkeeper All. v. EPA, 853 F.3d 527 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (EPA’s final rule creating exemption to CERCLA reporting requirements was not reasonable interpretation of statutory ambiguity) Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. Zinke, 849 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (Upholding FWS rule to remove the gray wolf in Wyoming from the endangered species list.) Text

Humane Soc’y of the U.S. v. Zinke, 865 F.3d 585 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (FWS’s designation of a distinct population segment of grey wolf was arbitrary and capricious.) Text

Silver State Land, LLC v. Schneider, 843 F.3d 982 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (FLPMA did not supplant BLM’s plenary power to terminate invalid modified competitive sale of public land to developer) Text

Indian River County v. Rogoff, 201 F.Supp.3d 1 (D. D.C. 2016) (Counties alleged existence of major federal action for which NEPA analysis was required) Text

U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA, 830 F.3d 579 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (EPA’s failure to issue emissions limits for hazardous air pollutants from five subcategories of solid waste incinerators violated CAA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. EPA, 830 F.3d 529 (EPA acted reasonably within its statutory authority under CAA in adopting relaxed deadlines for state compliance) Text

Mingo Logan Coal Co. v. EPA, 829 F.3d 710 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (EPA adequately explained decision to modify discharge permit) Text

Public Employees for Envtl. Responsibility v. Hopper, 827 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (BOEM’s environmental impact statement failed to take required “hard look” under NEPA) Text

Sierra Club v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 827 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (FERC complied with NEPA by adequately considering indirect environmental effects of project) Text

Public Employees for Envtl. Responsibility v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 189 F.Supp.3d 1 (D. D.C. 2016) (Appropriate remedy for FWS NEPA violates was to vacate orders until new NEPA analysis could be done) Text

Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. U.S. 177 F.Supp.3d 1 (D. D.C. 2016) (USFS’s purpose and need statement for NEPA analysis was not too narrow) Text

Public Employees for Envtl. Responsibility v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 177 F.Supp.3d 146 (D. D.C. 2016) (Environmental assessment prepared in connection with FWS did not comply with NEPA) Text

Mayo v. Jarvis, 177 F.Supp.3d 91 (D. D.C. 2016) (NPS was not required by NEPA to prepare site-specific EIS annually for elk hunting) Text

Silver State Land, LLC v. Schneider, 145 F.Supp.3d 113 (D. D.C. 2015) (FLPMA did not require BLM to issue land patent to purchaser where consummation of sale would have been unlawful) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 803 F.3d 31 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (NEPA review of entire oil pipeline construction project was not warranted) Text

Western Org. Res. Councils v. Jewell, 124 F.Supp.3d 7 (D. D.C. 2015) (Government had not duty under NEPA to supplement original EIS for federal coal management program) Text

EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (Requirements for States to reduce their emissions under the CAA by more than the amount necessary were invalid) Text

Mississippi Comm’n on Envtl. Quality v. EPA, 790 F.3d 138 (D. D.C. 2015) (EPA’s interpretation of “nearby” in CAA to not include broad, multi-state areas was reasonable) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. EPA, 106 F.Supp.3d 95 (D. D.C. 2015) (Court of appeals had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to FIFRA’s jurisdiction grant) Text

Union Neighbors United, Inc. v. Jewell, 83 F.Supp.3d 280 (D. D.C. 2015) (FWS complied with EA on application for permit for incidental taking of endangered Indiana bats) Text

Ctr. for Food Safety v. Jewell, 83 F.Supp.3d 126 (D. D.C. 2015) (Remand to FWS was appropriate under NEPA to consider environmental impacts of using genetically modified crops of wildlife refuge) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council v. EPA, 777 F.3d 456 (D. D.C. 2014) (EPA’s extension of schedule of attainment deadlines for ozone standard violated the CAA) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 64 F.Supp.3d 128 (D. D.C. 2014) (NEPA review was not required for entire private oil pipeline prior to construction) Text

Zook v. McCarthy, 52 F.Supp.3d 69 (D. D.C. 2014) (EPA did not have nondiscretionary duty to list pollutants from animal feeding operations as criteria pollutants under the CAA) Text

Sierra Club v. EPA, 755 F.3d 968 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (EPA’s Gasification Exclusion Rule exempting residuals of refining process used for fuel from RCRA regulation violated RCRA) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. FERC, 753 F.3d 1304 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (FERC violated NEPA by failing to consider cumulative impacts) Text

Nat’l Envrtl. Dev. Ass’n’s Clean Air Project v. EPA, 752 F.3d 999 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (EPA directive that it would continue applying CAA permitting standard espite Sixth Circuit ruling against the standard violated EPA regulations) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. EPA, 751 F.3d 649 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (EPA’s denial of petition to initiate rulemaking was reasonable under CAA) Text

Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs. v. EPA, 750 F.3d 921 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (EPA’s decision to lower the air quality standard for particular matter was reasonable under CAA) Text

Lockheed Martin Corp. v. U.S., 35 F.Supp.3d 92 (D. D.C. 2014) (Government was not an operator of rocket motor production facilities under CERCLA) Text

Communities for a Better Env’t v. EPA, 748 F.3d 333 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (EPA’s decision not to alter primary air quality standards for carbon monoxide was reasonable under CAA) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 8 F.Supp.3d 17 (D. D.C. 2014) (BLM took hard look at impact on climate change of its decision to lease public land for coal mining in compliance with NEPA) Text

Oceana v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Mgmt., 37 F.Supp.3d 147 (D. D.C. 2014) (Agency complied with NEPA’s hard look requirement in approving oil leases in area of Deepwater Horizon oil spill) Text

Powder River Basin Res. Council v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 37 F.Supp.3d 59 (D. D.C. 2014) (BLM complied with NEPA’s hard look requirement in considering impacts on elk herd from proposed oil and gas development) Text

Oceana, Inc. v. Pritzker, 24 F.Supp.3d 49 (D. D.C. 2014) (Agency amending its fishery management plan complied with NEPA’s hard look requirement) Text

WildEarth Guardians v. Jewell, 738 F.3d 298 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (BLM complied with NEPA’s hard look requirement in considering the effect of its decision to lease public lands for coal mining) Text

Mississippi v. EPA, 744 F.3d 1334 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (EPA properly considered body of scientific evidence in revising air quality standards for ozone under CAA) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 990 F.Supp.2d 9 (Corps was not required to conduct full NEPA review in connection with oil pipeline) Text

Appalachian Voices v. McCarthy, 989 F.Supp.2d 30 (D. D.C. 2013) (RCRA amendment removed regulation of coal ash, as hazardous waste, from RCRA’s general regulatory scheme) Text

Nat’l Ass’n of Clean Water Agencies v. EPA,734 F.3d 1115 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (CAA authorized EPA to regulate sewage sludge incinerators) Text

City of Dover v. U.S. EPA, 956 F.Supp.2d 272 (D. D.C. 2013) (Report addressing nutrient levels for tidal estuary was not a water quality standard) Text

Mingo Logan Coal Co. v. U.S. EPA, 714 F.3d 608 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (EPA had authority under CWA to withdraw disposal site specification post-permit) Text

In re Polar Bear Endangered Species Act List and Section 4(d) Rule Litigation, 709 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (Upholding FWS’s decision to list the polar bear under the ESA.) Text

Conservation Force v. Salazar, 699 F.3d 538 Text

Desert Citizens Against Pollution v. EPA, 699 F.3d 524 (EPA reasonably interpreted CAA provision naming seven hazardous air pollutants) Text

Ctr. for Food Safety v. Salazar, 898 F.Supp.2d 130 (D. D.C. 2012) (FWS took hard look under NEPA at problem presented by decision to allowing farming on wildlife refuge land) Text

EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (EPA exceeded its authority under the good neighbor provision of CAA) Text

Nat’l Envtl. Dev. Ass’n’s Clean Air Project v. EPA, 686 F.3d 803 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (NAAQS set for sulfur dioxide was reasonable under CAA) Text

American Petroleum Inst. v. EPA, 684 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (EPA did not violate CAA in adopting new, one-hour primary NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide) Text

Coal. for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (EPA endangerment finding under CAA was not arbitrary and capricious) Text

Flaherty v. Bryson, 850 F.Supp.2d 38 (D. D.C. 2012) (Agency violated NEPA by failing to take hard look at environmental consequences of annual catch limits for Atlantic herring) Text

Woodstream Corp. v. Jackson, 845 F.Supp.2d 174 (D. D.C. 2012) (Under FIFRA, EPA may place conditions on rodenticide registrations unrelated to test data) Text

Sierra Club v. Van Antwerp, 661 F.3d 1147 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (Corps complied with NEPA in issuing FONSI for development located on wetlands) Text

Alaska v. Lubchenco, 825 F.Supp.2d 209 (D. D.C. 2011) (NMFS’s decision to list the Cook Inlet beluga whale under the ESA was reasonable.) Text

Theodore Roosevelt Conservation P’ship v. Salazar, 661 F.3d 66 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (BLM considered reasonable range of alternatives under NEPA in addressing proposal to expand natural gas development) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council v. EPA, 661 F.3d 662 (EPA’s interpretation of CAA conformity provision was reasonable) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 777 F.Supp.2d 44 (D. D.C. 2011) (Agency’s financial assistance as to power plant expansion project was major federal action subject to NEPA) Text

Reckitt Benckiser, Inc. v. Jackson, 762 F.Supp.2d 34 (D. D.C. 2011) (EPA lacked authority under FIFRA to bring a misbranding action in lieu of a cancellation proceeding) Text

Reed v. Salazr, No. 08-2117 (CKK), 09-640 (CKK), 2010 WL 3853218 (D. D.C. Sept. 28, 2010) (order to set aside annual funding agreement for operation of bison range between Fish and Wildlife Service and Indian tribe)  Text

Cloud Found. v. Salazar, No. 1:09-CV-1651, 2010 WL 3338546 (D. D.C. 2010) (challenge to federal removal of wild horses from horse range)  Text

Sierra Club v. Van Antwerp, No. 07-1756(RCL), 2010 WL 3292182 (D. D.C. Aug. 20, 2010) (successful challenge against decision to allow filling of wetlands for shopping mall development)  Text

Nat’l Ass’n of Home Builders v. E.P.A., No. 09-0548, 2010 WL 3245302 (D. D.C. Aug. 18, 2010) (EPA’s designation of two Arizona rivers as “traditional navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act)  Text

Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, No. 09-0236, 2010 WL 3238848 (D. D.C. Aug. 17, 2010) (federal government’s revised critical habitat designations for piping plover)  Text

Howmet Corp. v. E.P.A., 614 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (manufacturer violated Resource Conservation and Recovery Act)  Text

New Hope Power Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 2838538 (D. D.C. 2010) (prior converted croplands; renewable energy; jurisdiction on CWA)  Text

In Defense of Animals v. Salazar, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 2076921 (D. D.C. 2010) (challenge under NEPA and the Wild Horse Act)  Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. Salazar, — F.Supp.2d —, 2010 WL 1140719 (D.D.C. 2010) (no NEPA violations in elk feeding rules)  Text

Am. Soc’y for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Feld Entertainment, Inc., — F.Supp.2d —, 2009 WL 5159752 (D.D.C. 2009) (standing; Endangered Species Act)  Text

Friends of Animals v. Salazar, 670 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C. 2009) (listing of animals as threatened or endangered under the ESA)  Text

Natural Res. Def. Council v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (challenging change rules for NAAQS for ozone to eight hour standard)  Text

Catawba County v. EPA, 571 F.3d 20 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (no violations in promulgation of NAAQS for fine particulate matter)  Text

Friends of Animals v. Salazar, 572 F.3d 1115 (D.D.C. 2009) (standing under ESA; allowing for the breeding and hunting of endangered elk by private ranches)  Text

Am. Farm Bureau Fed’n v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (review of NAAQS standards)  Text

County of San Miguel v. Kempthorne, 587 F.Supp.2d 64 (D.D.C. 2008) (listing of Gunnison sage-grouse on Endangered Species List)  Text

Otay Mesa Prop. L.P. v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 584 F.Supp.2d 122 (D.D.C. 2008) (critical habitat designation)  Text

Weaver’s Cove Energy, LLC v. R.I. Dep’t of Envtl. Mgmt., 524 F.3d 1330 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (lack of standing to challenge dredge and fill inaction by state)  Text

Ass’n of Irritated Residents v. E.P.A., 494 F.3d 1027 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (review of EPA enforcement action)   Text

Hawai”i Orchid Growers Ass’n v. Johanns, 249 Fed. Appx. 204 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (Imports threatening endangered species)

Physicians Comm. for Responsible Medicine v. EPA, 451 F.Supp. 2d 223 (D.D.C. 2006) (EPA rulemaking)   Text

Friends of Earth, Inc. v. EPA, 446 F.3d 140 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (review of EPA approved TMDLs)   Text 

Natural Res. Def. Council v. Johnson, 422 F.Supp. 2d 105 (D.D.C. 2006) (EPA pesticide registration)  Text

Beyond Pesticides v. Johnson, 407 F.Supp. 2d 38 (D.D.C. 2005) (EPA pesticide reregistration)   Text

Gem County Mosquito Abatement Dist. v. EPA, 398 F.Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2005) (county gov. NPDES permit)   Text

Bravos v. Green, 306 F.Supp.2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004) (review of state implementation TMDL plan)   Text

Beyond Pesticides v. Whitman, 360 F.Supp. 2d 69 (D.D.C. 2004) (EPA registration)   Text

Beyond Pesticides v. Whtiman, 294 F.Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2003) (EPA registration)  Text

CropLife Am. v. EPA, 329 F.3d 876 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (EPA rulemaking)  Text

Friends of Earth v. U.S. EPA, 333 F.3d 184 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (lack of subject matter jurisdiction to review TMDL)   Text

San Juan Audubon Soc’y v. Wildlife Serv., 257 F.Supp. 2d 133 (D.D.C. 2003) (citizen suit standing)   Text

Nw. Coal. for Alternatives to Pesticides v. EPA, 254 F.Supp. 2d 125 (D.D.C. 2003) (EPA and FOIA)  Text

Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Bosworth, 209 F.Supp.2d 156 (D.D.C. 2002) (failure to comply with NEPA when renewing grazing permits)  Text

Am. Crop Protection Ass’n v. EPA, 182 F.Supp. 2d 89 (D.D.C. 2002) (non-testifying experts’ opinions)   Text

Cheminova A/S v. Griffin L.L.C., 182 F.Supp. 2d 68 (D.D.C. 2002) (FIFRA registration)   Text


 

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

American Vanguard Corp. v. United States, 142 Fed.Cl. 320 (Fed. Cl. 2019) (FIFRA did not create the right to sell pesticides) Text

Lost Tree Village Corp. v. United States, 787 F.3d 1111 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (Corps’ denial of wetland fill permit was a taking) Text

Pioneer Reserve, LLC v. United States, 119 Fed.Cl.201 (Fed. Cl. 2014) (Wetlands mitigation banking instrument was a contract) Text

Shell Oil Co. v. United States, 751 F.3d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (Gas contracts required government to indemnify oil producers for cleanup costs incurred under CERCLA) Text

Lost Tree Village Corp. v. United States, 115 Fed.Cl.219 (Fed. Cl. 2014) (Denial of wetland fill permit was a taking) Text

Blue Lake Forest Prods., Inc. v. United States, 86 Fed. Cl. 366 (Fed. Cl. 2009) (breach of timber sales contract because of environmental regulations)

Brace v. United States, 72 Fed. Cl. 337 (Fed. Cl. 2006), aff’d, 250 F. App’x 359 (Fed. Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 1658 (2008) (CWA restoration plan was not a taking)

Klamath Irrigation Dist. v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 504 (Fed. Cl. 2005) (consequences of species designation)

Hansen v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 76 (Fed. Cl. 2005) (groundwater contamination)

Brace v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 649 (Fed. Cl. 2002) (“navigable waters”, takings)

Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage Dist. v. United States, 49 Fed. Cl. 313 (Fed. Cl. 2001) (consequences of species designation)


 

INTERNATIONAL COURTS

Hoffman v. Monsanto Canada, Inc., 7 W.W.R. 665 (2005) (GMO effect on endangered or threatened species)


 

ALABAMA

Ala. Dep’t of Envtl. Mgmt. v. Ala. Rivers Alliance, Inc., 14 So.3d 853 (Ala. Civ. App. 2007) (reversing approval of NPDES permit that would lead to violation of water quality standards)   Text

Ala. Dep’t of Envtl. Mgmt. v. Legal Envtl. Assistance Found., Inc., 922 So.2d 101 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005) (review of water quality antidegradation regulations)   Text

Ex parte Legal Envtl. Assistance Found., Inc., 832 So.2d 61 (Ala. 2002) (review of antidegradation policy)  Text


 

ARIZONA

Dillon v. Zeneca Corp., 42 P.3d 598 (Ariz. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)  Text


 

ARKANSAS

Harry Stephens Farms, Inc. v. Wormald Americas, Inc., Nos. 2:06CV00166 JMM, 2:07CV00278, 2007 WL 3217525 (E.D. Ark. Oct. 24, 2007) (farmland contamination suit time barred)

McCorkle Farms, Inc. v. Thompson, 84 S.W.3d 884 (Ark. 2002) (pesticide drift)  Text


 

CALIFORNIA

All. for California Business v. State Air Res. Bd., 23 Cal.App.5th 1050 (Ca. Ct. App. 2018) (Challenge to regulation approved by EPA as part of state implementation plan under CAA was precluded from state court review) Text

Dep’t of Finance v. Comm’n on State Mandates, 18 Call.App.5th 662 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) (CWA did not mandate “maximum extend practicable” standard in providing for pollutant reduction in permits) Text

Coastal Envtl. Rights Found. v. California Regional Water Quality Control Bd., 12 Cal.App.5th 178 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) (Approval of NPDES general permit complied with CWA) Text

Conway v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 235 Cal.App.4th 671 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) (Water Quality Control Board could state TMDL pollution allocation in terms of concentrations of pollutants) Text

Garland v. Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Bd., 210 Cal.App.4th 557 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (Discharge to navigable waters was governed by CWA) Text

Sonoma County Water Coalition v. Sonoma County Water Agency, 116 Cal.Rptr.3d 616 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (challenge to adequacy of county water agency’s urban water management plan rejected)  Text

Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. California Dep’t of Forestry and Fire Protection, 114 Cal.Rptr.3d 351 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (challenge to state approval of timber harvesting plans)  Text

Madera Irrigation Dist. v. Madera City Bd. of Supervisors, No. F054218, 2009 WL 783022 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2009) (reversing decision to grant attorney’s fees for violation of state environmental review statutes)  Text

Ass’n of Irritated Residents v. San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control Dist., 85 Cal.Rptr.3d 590(Cal. Ct. App. 2008) (force district to adopt CAA standards for CAFOs)  Text

Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. Cal. Dep’t of Pesticide Regulation, 39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 393 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (state pesticide regulation)  Text

Brazil v. Sara Lee Corp., No. D045925, 2006 WL 181597 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 26, 2006) (FIFRA preemption)

Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. Dep’t of Food & Agric., 38 Cal. Rptr. 3d 638 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005) (state pesticide regulation)   Text

Cmtys. for a Better Env’t v. State of Water Res. Control Bd., 109 Cal.App.4th 1089 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) (water quality-based effluent limitations did not need to be numeric standards)  Text


 

CONNECTICUT

Red 11, LLC v. Conservation Comm’n of Town of Fairfield, 980 A.2d 917 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009) (upholding order to prohibit agricultural activities impacting wetlands)   Text


 

FLORIDA

Curd v. Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC, 993 So.2d 1078 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008) (damages caused by pesticide leaking into fishing grounds)  Text

E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. Aquamar S.A., 881 So.2d 1 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. Desarrollo Indus., 857 So.2d 925 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Castillo v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 854 So.2d 1264 (Fla. 2003) (pesticide drift)   Text


GEORGIA

City of Guyton v. Barrow, 828 S.E.2d 366 (Ga. 2019) (CWA antidegradation rule did not require state agency to complete antidegradation analysis for nonpoint source discharge) Text

IDAHO

Idaho Conservation League, Inc. v. Idaho State Dept. of Agriculture, 146 P.3d 632 (Idaho 2006) (disclosure of Nutrient Management Plans)   Text

Asarco, Inc. v. State, 69 P.3d 139 (Idaho 2003) (invalidating state TMDLs)   Text


 

ILLINOIS

Rochester Buckhart Action Group v. Young, 887 N.E.2d 49 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008) (definition of “new facility” under state law)  Text

Valstad v. Cipriano, 828 N.E.2d 854 (Ill. Ct. App. 2005) (allowing state fees for NPDES permits)   Text

Kleiss v. Bozdech, 811 N.E.2d 330 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004) (crop damage action) (pesticide drift)   Text

Traube v. Freund, 775 N.E.2d 212 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

Diehl v. Polo Coop. Ass’n, 766 N.E.2d 317 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)   Text


 

INDIANA

Nat. Res. Defense Council v. Poet Biorefining-North Manchester, LLC, 15 N.E.3d 555 (Ind. 2014) (State was not required to formally amend its CAA state implementation plan before changing how it interpreted “chemical process plants”) Text

Gresser v. Dow Chemical Co., Inc., 989 N.E.2d 339 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (Pesticide registered under FIFRA was entitled to statutory presumption that it was not defective) Text

Byrd v. E.B.B. Farms, 796 N.E.2d 747 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (pesticide drift)   Text


 

IOWA

Freeman v. Grain Processing Corp., 848 N.W.2d 58 (Iowa, 2014) (Residents’ claims against milling facility were not preempted by CAA) Text

Sierra Club v. Wayne Weber, L.L.C., 689 N.W.2d 696 (Iowa 2004) (nuisance action)   Text

Worth County Friends of Agric. v. Worth County, 688 N.W.2d 257 (Iowa, 2004) (home rule authority)   Text

Gacke v. Pork Xtra, L.L.C., 684 N.W.2d 168 (Iowa 2004) (validity of right to farm law)   Text


 

KANSAS

David v. Board of Com’rs of Norton County, 89 P.3d 893 (Kan. 2004) (county CAFO law challenged)  Text


KENTUCKY

Brown-Forman Corp. v. Miller, 528 S.W.3d 886 (Ky. 2017) (CAA did not preempt property owner’s state tort claims) Text

Louisville Gas and Elec. Co. v. Kentucky Waterways All., 517 S.W.3d 479 (Ky. 2017) (Discharge permit subject to analysis under EPA regulations imposing limits on pollutants) Text

LOUISIANA

Lake Bistineau Preservation Soc’y, Inc. v. Seales, 922 So.2d 768 (La. Ct. App. 2006)   Text

Roche v. Jefferson Davis Elec. Coop., 922 So.2d 759 (La. Ct. App. 2006)   Text

Wood v. Becnel, 840 So.2d 1225 (La. Ct. App. 2003)   Text


MARYLAND

Maryland Dep’t of Env’t v. Anacostia Riverkeeper, 134 A.3d 892 (Md. Ct. App. 2016) (Discharge permits complied with CWA) Text

Maryland Dep’t of Env’t v. Anacostia Riverkeeper, 112 A.3d 979 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2013) (Permit was subject to standard for NPDES permits) Text

MASSACHUSETTS

Franklin Office Park Realy Corp. v. Comm’r of Dept. of Envtl. Protection, 466 Mass. 454 (Mass. 2013) (Violation of CAA was willful and not the result of error) Text

Town of Barnstable v. Cape Wind Assoc., LLC, 27 Mass.L.Rptr. 111, 2010 WL 2436837 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2010) (challenge to a final environmental impact report concerning a wind farm)


 

MICHIGAN

Michigan Farm Bureau v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 807 F.W.2d 866 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011) (DEQ had authority to require feedlot operators to apply for NPDES permit) Text

Sierra Club Mackinac County v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 766 N.W.2d 857 (Mich. 2009) (upholding reversal of declaratory judgment for state CAFO program)  Text

Sierra Club Mackinac Chapter v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 747 N.W.2d 321 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008) (review of state general CAFO permit)   Text


 

MINNESOTA

Matter of Decision to Deny Petitions for a Contested Case Hearing, 924 N.W.2d 638 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019) (Agency not required to designated separate TMDLs for affected lake) Text

In re Dairy Dozen-Theif River Falls, LLP, Nos. A09-936, A09-1406, 2010 WL 2161781 (Minn. Ct. App. June 01, 2010) (timeliness of appeal for feedlot permit)  Text

Wakefield Pork, Inc. v. Ram Mut. Ins. Co., 731 N.W.2d 154 (Minn. App. 2007) (odor within pollution exclusion)   Text

Berne Area Alliance for Quality Living v. Dodge County Bd. of Com’rs, 694 N.W.2d 577 (Minn.App. 2005) (Environmental Impact Statement)  Text

Anderson v. State, 693 N.W.2d 181 (Minn. 2005) (allowable state law claims)   Text

Anderson v. State, 674 N.W.2d 748 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004) (pesticide drift)   Text

Vasgaard v. Murray County Bd. of Com’rs, 2003 WL 21962493 (Minn. App. 2003) (challenge to denial of petition for Environmental Assessment Worksheet)

Wendinger v. Forst Farms, Inc., 662 N.W.2d 546 (Minn. App. 2003) (farming operation challenged)   Text

Hentges v. Minn. Bd. of Water & Soil Res., 638 N.W.2d 441 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002) (denial of wetlands exemption)   Text


 

MISSISSIPPI

Sierra Club v. Miss. Envtl. Quality Permit Bd., 943 So.2d 673 (Miss. 2006) (challenge to issuance of air pollution control permit)   Text


 

MISSOURI

Mo. Soybean Ass’n v. Mo. Clean Water Comm’n, 102 S.W.3d 10 (Mo. 2003) (no subject-matter jurisdiction to review state list of rivers to be protected under CWA)   Text


 

NEBRASKA

D B Feedyards, Inc. v. Envtl. Sci., Inc., 745 N.W.2d 593 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008) (breach of CWA consulting agreement)   ;Text

Premium Farms v. County of Holt, 640 N.W.2d 633, (Neb. 2002) (county regulatory authority)   Text


 

NEW JERSEY

In re Freshwater Wetlands Prot. Act Rules, 852 A.2d 167 (N.J. 2004) (allowing expansion of cranberry operations)  Text


 

NEW MEXICO

The Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. N.M. Water Quality Control Comm’n, 94 P.3d 788 (N.M. Ct. App. 2004) (water quality standards for waters used for fisheries)  Text


 

NEW YORK

Application of Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Seggos, 75 N.Y.S. 3d 854 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2018) (Challenging CAFO general permit under CWA) Text

Esposito v. Contec, Inc., 47 N.Y.S.3d 180 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017) (Plaintiff’s tort claims against fungicide product manufacturer were not preempted by FIFRA) Text

Global Cos., LLC v. New York State Dep’t of Envtl. Conservation, 35 N.Y.S.3d 830 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016) (Applicant for air permit modification, under CAA, was denied due process by state agency) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council. Inc. v. New York State Dep’t of Envtl. Conservation, 34 N.E.3d 782 (N.Y. 2015) (Stormwater discharge permitting system did not violate CWA) Text

Blue Lawn, Inc. v. County of Westchester, 293 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002) (compliance with state environmental standards)   Text

Nature’s Trees, Inc. v. County of Suffolk, 293 A.D.2d 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002) (compliance with state environmental standards)   Text

Nature’s Trees, Inc. v. County of Nassau, 293 A.D.2d 544 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002) (compliance with state environmental standards)   Text

N.Y. State Lawncare Ass’n v. County of Albany, 292 A.D.2d 719 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002) (compliance with state environmental standards)   Text


 

NORTH CAROLINA

Dunn v. Cook, 693 S.E.2d 752 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010) (conservation easement)  Text


 

OREGON

Eastern Oregon Mining Ass’n v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 445 P.3d 251 (Or. 2019) (State could issue CWA permit regulating discharge) Text

Eastern Oregon Mining Ass’n v. Dep’t Envtl. Quality, 398 P.3d 449 (Or. Ct. App. 2017) (DEQ could issue permit regulating discharge) Text

Bridgeview Vineyards, Inc. v. State Land Bd., 154 P.3d 734 (Or. Ct. App. 2007), review denied, 174 P.3d 1016 (Or. 2007) (state dredge and fill permit exemptions)  Text

Hawes v. Oregon, 125 P.3d 778 (Or. Ct. App. 2005) (load limits for nonpoint source streams)   Text

Owen v. Div. of State Lands, 76 P.3d 158 (Or. Ct. App. 2003) (farm road maintenance exempted from permit requirements)   Text


 

SOUTH DAKOTA

In re Conditional Use Permit Denied to Meier, 645 N.W.2d 579 (S.D. 2002) (denial of farming permit)   Text


 

TEXAS

Barrera v. Hondo Creek Cattle Co., 132 S.W.3d 544 (Tex. App. 2004) (right to farm)   Text

Collins v. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm’n, 94 S.W.3d 876 (Tex. App 2002) (permit to change waste management system challenged)  Text

Am. Cyanamid Co. v. Geye, 79 S.W.3d 21 (Tex. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)   Text

City of Waco v. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm’n, 83 S.W.3d 169 (Tex. App. 2002) (regulation of CAFO permits)  Text


 

VIRGINIA

Crutchfield v. State Water Control Bd., 612 S.E.2d 249 (Va. Ct. App. 2005) (farmers challenging approval of NPDES permit)   Text


 

WASHINGTON

Snohomish Cty. v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 368 P.3d 194 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016) (CWA did not preempt vested rights doctrine) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. State, Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 356 P.3d 753 (Wastewater discharge permittee violated CWA) Text

Cmty. Ass’n for Restoration of Env’t v. Dep’t of Ecology, 205 P.3d 950 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009) (state general discharge permit approval for animal operations)  Text

Mendoza v. State, 135 Wash. App. 1026 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006)   Text

Mauk v. South Columbia Basin Irrigation Dist., 116 Wash. App. 1076 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003)

Hickle v. Whitney Farms, Inc., 64 P.3d 1244 (Wash. 2003). (hazardous waste on farmland)   Text

Uselmann v. Clark County, 114 Wash. App. 1045, 2002 WL 31630855 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002) (upholding regulatory fee for storm water regulation)

Eriksen v. Mobay Corp., 41 P.3d 488 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002) (FIFRA preemption)   Text