Subscribe for updates
Recent Posts
- D.C. Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s Designation of PFOA and PFOS as CERCLA Hazardous Substances
- Tenth Circuit Clarifies Diligent Prosecution Bar to Citizen Suits under Clean Air Act
- Eleventh Circuit Allows Federal Officer Removal for EPA-Directed Cleanup
- Supreme Court Holds FIFRA Preempts State-Law Failure-to-Warn Claims Challenging EPA-Approved Labels
- California Federal Court Holds Agencies May Be Liable Under Clean Air Act Citizen Suit Provision
Topics
- State Implementation Plans
- Venue
- NJDEP
- Connecticut
- Pollutants
- Federal Land Policy and Management Act
- Council on Environmental Quality
- Loper Bright
- Agency Action
- Public Trust Doctrine
- New Jersey Civil Rights Act
- Environmental Justice
- Disparate Impact
- Title VI
- Massachusetts
- Evidence
- Internal Investigation
- Citizens Suit
- Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
- Georgia
- FIFRA
- Major Questions Doctrine
- Lead Paint
- Greenwashing
- Good Faith Settlement
- Federal Facilities
- Statutory Notice
- Oil Pollution Act
- Federal Jurisdiction
- Owner Liability
- Court of Federal Claims
- Ripeness
- Renewable Fuel Standard
- Fish and Wildlife Service
- Greenhouse Gas
- Refinery
- Alaska
- Florida
- National Priorities List
- Vapor Intrusion
- Solvents
- Price-Anderson Act
- Solid Waste Management Act
- Successor Liability
- Personal Jurisdiction
- Operator Liability
- Potentially Responsible Parties
- Federal Circuit
- Environmental Covenants
- Apportionment
- National Contingency Plan
- Divisibility
- Water Pollution Control Act
- Strict Liability
- Utilities
- Historic Resources
- Public Utilities Commission
- Hydraulic Fracturing
- Water Use
- Ohio
- PFAS
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration
- Climate Change
- Auer Deference
- Commonwealth Court
- Fees
- West Virginia
- Forest Service
- TSCA
- Asbestos
- Martime
- Gold King Mine
- Tribal Lands
- Federal Tort Claims Act
- New Mexico
- Utah
- Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
- Delaware
- National Forest Management Act
- FERC
- Endangered Species Act
- Chevron Deference
- United States Supreme Court
- HSCA
- Corporate Veil
- Alter Ego
- Allocation
- Eleventh Amendment
- Delaware River Basin Commission
- Mining
- Intervention
- New Hampshire
- PCBs
- Building Materials
- First Circuit
- Property Damage
- Groundwater
- Natural Resource Damages
- Brownfield
- Brownfields
- Innocent Party
- Environmental Rights Amendment
- PHMSA
- Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- FOIA
- Effluents
- Sediment Sites
- EHB
- Texas
- Missouri
- Pipelines
- Injunction
- Coal Ash
- Spoliation
- TMDL
- Stormwater
- Safe Drinking Water Act
- Colorado
- Drinking Water
- Michigan
- North Carolina
- Bankruptcy
- Hearing Board
- Clean Streams Law
- Civil Penalties
- Arranger Liability
- Sovereign Immunity
- Retroactive
- Damages
- Tax assessment
- Property Value
- Stigma
- Fair Market Value
- Storage Tank
- Energy
- Fifth Circuit
- Electric
- Indemnification
- Arizona
- Ninth Circuit
- Attorney-Client
- OPRA
- Iowa
- Fourth Circuit
- Discovery Rule
- Eighth Circuit
- Administrative Appeals
- Taxes
- Preemption
- CAFA
- Contamination
- Natural Gas
- Procedure
- Residential
- Inspection
- Freshwater Wetlands Protect Act
- New York
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
- Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
- Natural Gas Act
- Mercury
- HAPs
- Hazardous Air Pollutants
- D.C. Circuit
- Takings
- Condemnation
- Storage
- Fifth Amendment
- Flooding
- Takings Clause
- Spill Act
- Causation
- NEPA
- Interior
- Mineral Leasing Act
- Tenth Circuit
- California
- Zoning
- Act 13
- Duty to Defend
- Insurance Coverage
- Landfill
- Eminent Domain
- Private Right of Action
- Sixth Circuit
- Illinois
- Water
- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
- Diligent Prosecution
- Citizen Suit
- Arkansas
- Pennsylvania
- Press
- Uncategorized
- Maryland
- Eleventh Circuit
- Riverbed
- Navigability
- Montana
- Equal-Footing Doctrine
- Seventh Circuit
- Indiana
- Breach of Contract
- Public Lands
- Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser
- Green House Counsel
- Delay Notice
- Rulemaking
- Consent Decree
- Equity
- Laches
- CISWI
- Boiler MACT
- EPA
- Enforcement
- Contribution
- Declaratory Relief
- Second Circuit
- NPDES
- Standing
- Medical Monitoring
- Dimock
- Case Update
- Legislation
- Dukes
- Certification
- Louisiana
- CLE
- Privilege
- Decisions of Note
- Work Product
- Expert Witness
- Discovery
- Cases to Watch
- Defense Costs
- Insurance
- Remediation
- Response Action Contractors
- Consultant Liability
- Negligence
- Rapanos
- Donovan
- Army Corps
- Nuisance
- Hog Barn
- Trespass
- Odors
- Class Actions
- Kentucky
- Farming
- ISRA
- Informal Agency Action
- New Jersey
- Administrative Hearing
- RCRA
- Railroad
- Air
- Cancer
- Combustion
- Emissions
- Waste
- CERCLA
- Speaking Engagements
- Federal Procedure
- Toxic Torts
- Third Circuit
- Removal
- Statute of Limitations
- Title V
- Clean Air Act
- Permits
- Cleanup
- Cost Recovery
- Supreme Court
- Superfund
- Tolling
- Statute of Repose
- Multi-District Litigation
- Camp Lejeune
- Marcellus Shale
- Deeds
- Wetlands
- Enforcement Action
- Administrative Procedures Act
- Clean Water Act
- Due Process
- Mineral Rights
- Leases
- Oil and Gas
- Real Estate
- Royalties
- Exploration
- Drilling
Blog editor
Blog Contributors
Showing 3 posts from May 2025.
In March 2024, the County of Bucks filed a controversial suit under state law against a number of large oil companies alleging the County was injured because of the companies’ deceptive conduct with respect to their impact on climate change. The Defendants filed various preliminary objections including lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, arguing that despite the County’s effort to focus the complaint on fraudulent practices, the case at bottom alleged harm from severe weather allegedly due to air emissions, which are governed exclusively by federal law. On May 16, 2025, the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas issued an opinion agreeing with the Defendants and dismissing the case entirely. See Bucks County v. BP P.L.C., et al., No. 2024-01836 (Bucks Cty. Com. Pl. May 16, 2025). Read More »
On May 1, 2025, the United Stated District Court for the Northern District of California evaluated a settlement agreement between a long-time generator of hazardous substances, an innocent plaintiff, and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”), and found that it met the requirements as a good faith agreement under both the California Code of Civil Procedure and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”). See Maxim L Properties v. Moyer Products, Ind., 2025 WL 1261419. The court ruled that a settlement agreement that, among other things, accounts for the “rough approximation” of liability is generally satisfactory in both California and under CERCLA. Read More »
On April 25, 2025, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division (the “Appellate Division”) in New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection et al. v. Desai et al., ruled on the statute of limitations for state claims brought under the New Jersey Spill Compensation and Control Act (the “Spill Act”), finding that claims concerning remediation do not begin to accrue until the remediation is complete. Read More »
|
Email|
Comments|
Topics: Agency Action, Cleanup, Cost Recovery, ISRA, New Jersey, Spill Act, Statute of Limitations
