We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 11

Rapanos wetlands confusion: Third Circuit accentuates the circuit split

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 4 2011

When the United States Supreme Court issued its wetlands defining decision in Rapanos v. United States, environmental practitioners, real estate developers, and consultants believed that boundaries would be set for determining when a wetland was regulated under the Clean Water Act

Federal Court reins in Corps’ regulation of wetlands

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 12 2010

A federal District Court judge in Florida has issued an order prohibiting the Army Corps of Engineers from expanding the Corps' authority under the Clean Water Act without first going through the appropriate administrative procedures

Indiana and Ohio petition U.S. Supreme Court to reverse greenhouse gases nuisance ruling

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 12 2010

Indiana and Ohio joined 10 other states, industry groups, and the Obama Administration to ask the U.. Supreme Court to reverse a greenhouse gases nuisance ruling in Connecticut v. American Electric Power Company, which allowed states and private plaintiffs to sue coal-fired utilities for contributing to global warming through carbon dioxide emissions

Federal district court dismisses PSD claims seeking civil penalties as time-barred

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 14 2010

A federal district court recently answered a common question in PSDNSR enforcement litigation: When is it too late to sue for civil penalties related to a major modification?

Federal district court rules in favor of coal-fired power plant and against government in prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) lawsuit

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 14 2010

Following a bench trial, a federal district court in the Sixth Circuit decided that the replacement of the economizer and superheater sections at a coal-fired power plant fell within the routine maintenance, repair, and replacement (RMRR) exception to PSD regulations

U.S. Supreme Court to hear utilities’ appeal of GHG nuisance lawsuit

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 7 2010

The U.S. Supreme Court will review the Second Circuit’s decision allowing a public nuisance lawsuit to continue against coal-fired, electricity-generating utility companies for their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions

Electrical utility is not a CERCLA “arranger"

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 12 2011

Plaintiffs, who owned a scrap yard, sued two of its utility customers under CERCLA for contribution towards the $1.37 million cost to conduct the State-mandated remediation of the on-site PCB contamination in Schiavone v. Northeast Utilities Service Company, 2011 WL 1106228 (D. Conn. Mar. 22, 2011

Federal district court partially tosses malpractice claims against enviro engineers

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 27 2011

A federal district court dismissed a lender’s claims for negligent misrepresentation and strict products liability against two environmental engineering firms related to a brownfield redevelopment project involving an old landfill, but allowed other claims seeking damages in excess of $10 million to continue against the firms for CERCLA cost recovery, breach of contract, and negligence

AEP v. Connecticut

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 11 2011

In a unanimous decision issued on June 20, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal legislation within the Clean Air Act displaces federal common law claims brought by eight states and New York City in a lawsuit against five major utility power companies

EPA's dog won't hunt

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 14 2011

Avenal Power Center, LLC prevailed in its lawsuit (Avenal Power Center, LLC v U.S. EPA, 2010 WL 6743488 (D.D.C.)) against U.S. EPA for its failure to grant or deny a PSD permit application for the construction of a natural gas-fired power plant within the statutorily mandated one-year period