Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case Holds that the Clean Water Act Can Encompass Groundwater
The United States Supreme Court in County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, 590 U.S. ___ (2020) issued a landmark decision involving the Clean Water Act (CWA), holding that a permit is required when there is a direct discharge of a pollutant from a point source or when there is a “functional equivalent” into navigable…
Ninth Circuit Rejects CERCLA’s “Third-Party Defense” In Connection with Tax Auction Sale
Ruling on a matter of “first impression,” the Ninth Circuit in California Department of Toxic Substances Control v Westside Delivery LLC, 2018 WL 1973715 (9th Cir. Apr. 27, 2018) held that real-estate purchasers who buy contaminated land through tax-sale default auctions are in “contractual privity” with prior owners and thus, may be subject to CERCLA…
The Ninth Circuit in United States v Spatig, 870 F.3d 1079 (9th Cir. 2017) recently held that defendants may not escape conviction under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act’s (RCRA) criminal enforcement provisions by invoking the “lack of mental” capacity defense. Because RCRA’s criminal provisions require only a showing that the defendant “knowingly” committed the…
Oregon Climate Change Battle Continues
This suit involves legal challenges by minor children seeking redress for alleged governmental inaction on climate change. Following the Oregon District Court’s denial of the federal government and industry intervenor’s motions to dismiss in November 2016, defendants petitioned the District Court to certify its ruling to allow for immediate review by the Court of Appeals…
Attorneys In The News
Norm Dupont spoke on August 30, 2017 at an ABA Section of Environment Energy and Resources webinar, “Supreme Court Year in Review: The Environmental Cases and a Review of Justice Gorsuch’s Environmental Jurisprudence. Norm’s presentation is available here. Norm Dupont spoke on legal tools for city attorneys confronted with environmental issues at the Orange County…
In People v. Davis, the state sued a marijuana cultivator who was convicted of illegally diverting the natural course of a stream. The defendant was convicted by the trial court and appealed the petty theft conviction, arguing there could be no theft because the State of California has only a regulatory interest in use of…
