ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CASES

• E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. US
• Ingraham v. Planning Board of Town of Southeast
• Cal. Forestry Ass'n v. Cal. Fish & Game Comm'n

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, November 20, 2007
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. US, No. 04-2096
On remand from the Supreme Court for reconsideration in an action brought by DuPont under CERCLA to recover from the U.S. a portion of certain hazardous waste cleanup costs it incurred, summary judgment for the government is reversed and remanded with respect to any claim made by DuPont for costs incurred while undertaking voluntary cleanup efforts where, pursuant to recent Supreme Court precedent, DuPont stated a viable cause of action for cost recovery under CERCLA section 107(a). Read more...

New York Court of Appeals, November 19, 2007
Ingraham v. Planning Board of Town of Southeast, No. 2 No. 149, 150
The lead agency under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), engaged in the requisite scrutiny of a project and regulatory changes that arose after the filing of a SEQRA Findings Statement, and made a reasoned elaboration, using studies and data already available in the file, that a second Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) was not necessary to address those changes. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, November 20, 2007
Cal. Forestry Ass'n v. Cal. Fish & Game Comm'n, No. C053866
Challenge to trial court's ruling upholding the listing of two coho salmon evolutionarily significant units as endangered and threatened under the California Endangered Species Act is denied as the term "species or subspecies" includes "evolutionarily significant units," making those units entitled to protection under the CESA. Moreover, the term "range" refers to a species' California range only. Read more...