Subscribe for updates
Recent Posts
- Ninth Circuit Finds Clean Water Act Suit Seeking Only Civil Penalties Becomes Moot Once Wrongful Conduct Ceased
- Environmental Groups Denied Intervention in Constitutional Challenge to New York’s Climate Law
- Second Circuit Orders Attorneys’ Fees for Removal Arguments in New York City Climate Change Case
- Third Circuit Affirms Bankruptcy Jurisdiction to Interpret Confirmation Order and Denies Collateral Attack in Pending CERCLA Litigation
- Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Holds that Cultural Uses May Be Considered in Natural Resource Damage Assessments
Topics
- State Implementation Plans
- Venue
- NJDEP
- Connecticut
- Pollutants
- Federal Land Policy and Management Act
- Agency Action
- Loper Bright
- Council on Environmental Quality
- Public Trust Doctrine
- New Jersey Civil Rights Act
- Title VI
- Environmental Justice
- Disparate Impact
- 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
- Personal Jurisdiction
- Successor Liability
- Operator Liability
- Potentially Responsible Parties
- Environmental Covenants
- Federal Circuit
- Divisibility
- National Contingency Plan
- Apportionment
- Strict Liability
- Water Pollution Control Act
- Public Utilities Commission
- Historic Resources
- Utilities
- Hydraulic Fracturing
- Water Use
- Ohio
- PFAS
- Arbitration
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Climate Change
- Auer Deference
- Commonwealth Court
- Fees
- West Virginia
- Forest Service
- TSCA
- Asbestos
- Martime
- Tribal Lands
- Gold King Mine
- Utah
- Federal Tort Claims Act
- New Mexico
- Delaware
- Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
- FERC
- National Forest Management Act
- United States Supreme Court
- Chevron Deference
- Endangered Species Act
- HSCA
- Alter Ego
- Corporate Veil
- Allocation
- Eleventh Amendment
- Delaware River Basin Commission
- Mining
- Intervention
- New Hampshire
- First Circuit
- Property Damage
- PCBs
- Building Materials
- Groundwater
- Natural Resource Damages
- Brownfield
- Innocent Party
- Brownfields
- Environmental Rights Amendment
- Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- PHMSA
- Effluents
- FOIA
- Sediment Sites
- EHB
- Texas
- Missouri
- Pipelines
- Injunction
- Coal Ash
- Spoliation
- TMDL
- Stormwater
- Safe Drinking Water Act
- Colorado
- Drinking Water
- Michigan
- North Carolina
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Penalties
- Hearing Board
- Clean Streams Law
- Arranger Liability
- Sovereign Immunity
- Retroactive
- Damages
- Property Value
- Stigma
- Fair Market Value
- Tax assessment
- Storage Tank
- Indemnification
- Energy
- Fifth Circuit
- Electric
- Arizona
- Ninth Circuit
- Attorney-Client
- OPRA
- Iowa
- Discovery Rule
- Fourth Circuit
- Eighth Circuit
- Administrative Appeals
- Taxes
- Preemption
- CAFA
- Residential
- Inspection
- Freshwater Wetlands Protect Act
- New York
- Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
- Natural Gas Act
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
- Hazardous Air Pollutants
- HAPs
- D.C. Circuit
- Mercury
- Takings
- Condemnation
- Storage
- Natural Gas
- Flooding
- Fifth Amendment
- Takings Clause
- Causation
- Spill Act
- NEPA
- Interior
- Mineral Leasing Act
- Tenth Circuit
- California
- Zoning
- Act 13
- Insurance Coverage
- Duty to Defend
- Landfill
- Eminent Domain
- Sixth Circuit
- Private Right of Action
- Illinois
- Water
- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
- Citizen Suit
- Diligent Prosecution
- Arkansas
- Pennsylvania
- Press
- Uncategorized
- Maryland
- Eleventh Circuit
- Navigability
- Montana
- Equal-Footing Doctrine
- Riverbed
- Indiana
- Seventh Circuit
- Breach of Contract
- Public Lands
- Green House Counsel
- Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser
- EPA
- Laches
- Boiler MACT
- Delay Notice
- Rulemaking
- Equity
- CISWI
- Consent Decree
- Enforcement
- Declaratory Relief
- Second Circuit
- Contribution
- Procedure
- Standing
- NPDES
- Dimock
- Medical Monitoring
- Case Update
- Legislation
- Dukes
- Certification
- Contamination
- Louisiana
- CLE
- Cases to Watch
- Privilege
- Decisions of Note
- Expert Witness
- Discovery
- Work Product
- Defense Costs
- Cost Recovery
- CERCLA
- Insurance
- Real Estate
- Consultant Liability
- Negligence
- Remediation
- Response Action Contractors
- Donovan
- Rapanos
- Army Corps
- Nuisance
- Class Actions
- Hog Barn
- Kentucky
- Trespass
- Farming
- Odors
- ISRA
- Informal Agency Action
- Administrative Hearing
- New Jersey
- Cancer
- Emissions
- Waste
- Air
- Combustion
- RCRA
- Railroad
- Speaking Engagements
- Toxic Torts
- Removal
- Federal Procedure
- Third Circuit
- Title V
- Clean Air Act
- Statute of Limitations
- Permits
- Supreme Court
- Superfund
- Cleanup
- Multi-District Litigation
- Tolling
- Camp Lejeune
- Statute of Repose
- Wetlands
- Mineral Rights
- Administrative Procedures Act
- Enforcement Action
- Marcellus Shale
- Due Process
- Deeds
- Clean Water Act
- Exploration
- Royalties
- Drilling
- Oil and Gas
- Leases
Blog editor
Blog Contributors
Showing 3 posts in Evidence.
On July 9th, 2025, the Eastern District of New York ruled on a series of motions in Suffolk County Water Authority v. Dow Chemical Company, a case brought by the Suffolk County Water Authority (“Suffolk”) against chemical manufacturers for the alleged contamination of Suffolk’s groundwater supply with 1,4-dioxane (“dioxane”), a chemical classified by the EPA as a “probable human carcinogen.” Judge Gershon issued an opinion allowing most of the plaintiff’s common law tort claims to proceed to trial while clarifying the standard for expert admissibility under recently amended Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Read More »
|
Email|
Comments|
Topics: Causation, Contamination, Drinking Water, Evidence, Expert Witness, Groundwater, Negligence, New York, Nuisance, Pollutants, Strict Liability, Trespass, Water
On January 2, 2024, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan issued an order to exclude the expert testimony of Dr. Robert Michaels in a series of cases related to the corrosive water in Flint, Michigan. Carthan, et al. v. Snyder et al, No. 5:16-cv-1044 (E.D. Mich. 2024). The court held that Dr. Michaels, in applying a methodology commonly employed by epidemiologists known as the Bradford Hill guidelines, failed to establish an association between corrosive water and skin and hair conditions, and without such, the testimony was unreliable and could not be used to infer causation between Flint water and reported skin rashes and hair loss. Read More »
In In Re FirstEnergy Corp. Securities Litigation, case number 2:20-cv-03785 pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, the special master granted a motion to compel discovery of documents relating to an internal investigation performed by outside counsel for defendant FirstEnergy Corp. (“First Energy”) regarding the company’s role in an alleged bribery scheme. Because of a lack of admissible supporting evidence, the special master rejected the company’s position that the materials were protected by the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine and ordered FirstEnergy to produce all documents related to the internal investigation. Read More »
|
Email|
Comments|
Topics: Attorney-Client, Evidence, Internal Investigation, Privilege, Work Product
