In Gould Electronics v Livingston County Road Commission, 2022 WL 1467650 (6th Cir. May 10, 2022), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed a claim between the responsible party at a Superfund Site (Gould) and a neighbor (Livingston). The main
Forchelli Deegan Terrana LLP
The Firm represents a broad range of clients, including national, regional and local businesses, public, private and family-owned companies, major real estate developers, property owners and operators, contractors, banks, municipalities, educational institutions, not-for-profits, foundations, and individuals. Personal attention and quality representation that is both practical and cost-effective are hallmarks of the Firm.
Website:
https://www.forchellilaw.com/
Forchelli Deegan Terrana LLP Blogs
Blog Authors
Latest from Forchelli Deegan Terrana LLP
Environmental Justice in the Environmental Review Process: Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice v Federal Aviation Administration (9th Cir. November 18, 2021)
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice v Federal Aviation Administration reads like an ordinary environmental review decision. The issue was whether the agency took the required “hard look” at the potential…
The Government Can Regulate Use of Property, but Cannot Take Property Without Paying: Supreme Court Addresses the Line Between Regulating and Taking
In Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (decided June 23, 2021) the Supreme Court decided that a regulation that required agricultural employers to allow union representatives to access their property for up to 3 hours per day for 120 days per…
Standing to Sue: Can Environmental Organizations Create Standing to Sue – PETA v State Zoological Park
For an organization to sue to redress a perceived wrong, the organization must demonstrate that it has standing to sue, meaning that it is the proper party to bring the claim. One of the key requirements of standing is that…
Two Recent Appellate Division Decisions Reject Segmentation Arguments: It Cannot be Segmentation Unless There is a Plan
Two recent Appellate Division decisions addressed segmentation claims and concluded that there cannot be segmentation unless there is a plan. Under SEQRA (the State Environmental Quality Review Act), it is illegal to take a project that may have significant impacts…
New Caselaw Highlights the Boundary Between Environmental Law and Corporate Law
A recent decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals highlights the boundary between environmental law and corporate law. US v Sterling Centercorp Inc., 2020 WL 5885920 (10/5/20). The case arose out of a Superfund Site in California that was…
Chesapeake Action Network v EPA: Court Tells EPA to Reconsider Rule Because Petitioners Did Not Have a Fair Opportunity to Comment
It is not unusual for a developing rule or other agency action to be something of a moving target, with an agency responding to comments in a way that leaves some in the regulated community complaining that they did not…
Environmental Impact Statements: Which Effects of an Action are Impacts that must be Considered?
The recent decision by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Center for Biological Diversity v US Army Corps of Engineers, 2019 WL 5690619 (Nov. 4, 2019) concluded that impacts of an action that are “at most, tenuously caused” are…
Environmental Impact Statements: Which Effects of an Action are Impacts that must be Considered?
The recent decision by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Center for Biological Diversity v US Army Corps of Engineers, 2019 WL 5690619 (Nov. 4, 2019) concluded that impacts of an action that are “at most, tenuously caused” are…
Dispelling 5 Misconceptions About Environmental Issues, Continued
My post listing the top 5 misconceptions about environmental law received positive feedback, so I am continuing it in this post, listing misconceptions 6 through 10. The top 5 were statements that many transactional attorneys believe, but are false. Misconceptions…