ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CASES

• Goodman v. Praxair, Inc.
• OR Natural Res. Council Fund v. Timber Prods. Co.
• Forest Guardians v. US Forest Serv.
• Viva! Int'l Voice for Animals v. Adidas Promotional Retail Operations, Inc.

U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 25, 2007
Goodman v. Praxair, Inc., No. 06-1009
Dismissal of amended complaint for breach of contract is reversed where the district court erred in applying Maryland's three-year statute of limitations and in refusing to apply the relation back afforded by Rule 15(c), Fed. R. Civ. P., when plaintiff named the corporate subsidiary as a defendant. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 24, 2007
OR Natural Res. Council Fund v. Timber Prods. Co., No. 05-35063
In a challenge to a BLM plan to log protected land after a forest fire, an order granting a permanent injunction against the implementation of the plan is affirmed where: 1) the BLM violated the Federal Land Policy & Management Act by misinterpreting the relevant land use plan to allow the logging; and 2) the BLM's environmental impact statement for the logging plan did not contain an adequate cumulative effects analysis. Read more...

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 23, 2007
Forest Guardians v. US Forest Serv., No. 07-1020
In a challenge to a USFS plan to allow timber harvesting in the Rio Grande National Forest, judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the USFS complied with the Forest Plan's management indicator species-monitoring directives; 2) plaintiff failed to adequately present its claim that defendant did not provide substantial evidence for a conclusion that a relevant soil standard would be met in its administrative appeal, and thus forfeited it; and 3) defendant satisfied the requirements of NEPA by considering environmental impacts, even if it did not cancel the project because of them. Read more...

Supreme Court of California, July 23, 2007
Viva! Int'l Voice for Animals v. Adidas Promotional Retail Operations, Inc., No. S140064
In an suit involving athletic shoes made from kangaroo leather, summary judgment for defendant Adidas is reversed, as Penal Code section 653o, which prohibits the importation into or sale within California of products made from kangaroo, poses no obstacle to any current federal policy and is not prempted by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. section 1531 et seq. Read more...