Search this blog
Subscribe for updates
Subscribe for updates
Recent Posts
- District Court Rejects “Anticipatory” Pre-Suit Notice Letter in Dismissing Clean Water Act Claim
- Sixth Circuit Holds Forced Pooling Is Not A Taking
- California District Court Decision on Statute of Limitations in Contribution Actions Further Complicates Issue for Practitioners
- New Jersey Appellate Division Holds Judicial Estoppel as Available Defense to Spill Act Claims for Contribution
- Fourth Circuit Finds Forest Service Did Not Speak For The Trees
Topics
- National Forest Management Act
- FERC
- Endangered Species Act
- Chevron Deference
- United States Supreme Court
- HSCA
- Alter Ego
- Corporate Veil
- Allocation
- Eleventh Amendment
- Delaware River Basin Commission
- Minimg
- Intervention
- New Hampshire
- First Circuit
- PCBs
- Property Damage
- Building Materials
- Groundwater
- Natural Resource Damages
- Brownfields
- Brownfield
- Innocent Party
- Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- PHMSA
- Environmental Rights Amendment
- FOIA
- Effluents
- Sediment Sites
- EHB
- Texas
- Missouri
- Pipelines
- Coal Ash
- Injunction
- Spoliation
- Stormwater
- TMDL
- Safe Drinking Water Act
- Colorado
- Michigan
- Drinking Water
- North Carolina
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Penalties
- Clean Streams Law
- Hearing Board
- Arranger Liability
- Sovereign Immunity
- Retroactive
- Fair Market Value
- Damages
- Stigma
- Property Value
- Tax assessment
- Storage Tank
- Energy
- Electric
- Fifth Circuit
- Indemnification
- Ninth Circuit
- Arizona
- OPRA
- Attorney-Client
- Iowa
- Fourth Circuit
- Discovery Rule
- Eighth Circuit
- Administrative Appeals
- Taxes
- Preemption
- CAFA
- Freshwater Wetlands Protect Act
- Inspection
- Residential
- New York
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
- Natural Gas Act
- Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
- Hazardous Air Pollutants
- Mercury
- D.C. Circuit
- HAPs
- Condemnation
- Takings
- Natural Gas
- Storage
- Takings Clause
- Fifth Amendment
- Flooding
- Causation
- Spill Act
- NEPA
- Interior
- Mineral Leasing Act
- Tenth Circuit
- California
- Act 13
- Zoning
- Duty to Defend
- Insurance Coverage
- Eminent Domain
- Landfill
- Private Right of Action
- Sixth Circuit
- Water
- Illinois
- Citizen Suit
- Diligent Prosecution
- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
- Arkansas
- Pennsylvania
- Press
- Uncategorized
- Maryland
- Eleventh Circuit
- Equal-Footing Doctrine
- Montana
- Navigability
- Riverbed
- Indiana
- Seventh Circuit
- Breach of Contract
- Public Lands
- Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser
- Green House Counsel
- Consent Decree
- Enforcement
- Equity
- Laches
- Boiler MACT
- CISWI
- Delay Notice
- EPA
- Rulemaking
- Contribution
- Declaratory Relief
- Second Circuit
- Procedure
- NPDES
- Standing
- Dimock
- Medical Monitoring
- Legislation
- Case Update
- Louisiana
- Certification
- Contamination
- Dukes
- CLE
- Privilege
- Work Product
- Discovery
- Expert Witness
- Defense Costs
- Insurance
- Consultant Liability
- Negligence
- Remediation
- Response Action Contractors
- Army Corps
- Donovan
- Rapanos
- Class Actions
- Nuisance
- Odors
- Trespass
- Farming
- Hog Barn
- Kentucky
- ISRA
- Administrative Hearing
- Informal Agency Action
- New Jersey
- Emissions
- Railroad
- Air
- RCRA
- Waste
- Cancer
- Combustion
- CERCLA
- Speaking Engagements
- Federal Procedure
- Removal
- Third Circuit
- Toxic Torts
- Statute of Limitations
- Title V
- Clean Air Act
- Permits
- Cost Recovery
- Cleanup
- Superfund
- Supreme Court
- Camp Lejeune
- Multi-District Litigation
- Statute of Repose
- Tolling
- Clean Water Act
- Deeds
- Due Process
- Marcellus Shale
- Enforcement Action
- Mineral Rights
- Wetlands
- Cases to Watch
- Administrative Procedures Act
- Drilling
- Exploration
- Leases
- Oil and Gas
- Royalties
- Decisions of Note
- Real Estate
Blog editor
Blog Contributors
Showing 1 post in Maryland.
Yes, the per curium opinions in Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Ford, et al., No. 1804, September Term, 2009 (Md. Spec. App Feb. 9, 2012) are over a month old, but at 309 pages, it isn’t light reading. It takes a while to digest the five different opinions and try to reconcile, in any reasonable fashion, what they say. And while several issues were addressed by the court, we’re going to focus here on a favorite tort – medical monitoring. Read More »
