Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Common Law, Climate Torts, And Preclusion, Tom Boss
Federal Common Law, Climate Torts, And Preclusion, Tom Boss
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
Municipalities have been trying for decades to hold energy companies accountable for their role in the climate change crisis. In an effort to prevent suits, these companies are pushing the novel legal theory that federal common law provides a basis for jurisdiction in federal court over these claims. Once in federal court, the defendants argue that the very federal common law that served as the basis for removal has been displaced by the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. This would then justify dismissal of the entire case for failure to state a claim. Luckily for the plaintiffs, nearly all …
The New Front In The Clean Air Wars: Fossil-Fuel Influence Over State Attorneys General- And How It Might Be Checked, Eli Savit
Michigan Law Review
Review of Struggling for Air: Power and the "War On Coal" by Richard L. Revesz and Jack Leinke, and Federalism on Trial: State Attorneys General and National Policymaking in Contemporary America by Paul Nolette.
Surviving Preemption In A World Of Comprehensive Regulations, Kyle Anne Piasecki
Surviving Preemption In A World Of Comprehensive Regulations, Kyle Anne Piasecki
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat
The Clean Air Act imposes a federal regulatory regime on a number of sources of air pollution. It does not, however, provide a ready means of relief to individuals harmed by air polluters. Nevertheless, many courts have held that the Clean Air Act preempts state common law tort claims that do provide a means to such relief. The disparate benefits of the Clean Air Act and common law tort claims may indicate different purposes and make court imposed preemption of common law tort claims improper. This Comment argues that the Savings Clause in the Clean Air Act and in parallel …
Ruckleshaus V. Sierra Club: Muddying The Waters Of Fee-Shifting In Federal Environmental Litigation , Jeanne A. Taylor
Ruckleshaus V. Sierra Club: Muddying The Waters Of Fee-Shifting In Federal Environmental Litigation , Jeanne A. Taylor
Pepperdine Law Review
In numerous federal environmental statutes, Congress gave plaintiffs the right to recover attorneys' fees when the court finds them "appropriate." In Ruckleshaus v. Sierra Club, the United States Supreme Court held that it was only "appropriate" to grant attorneys' fees when the plaintiff had at least partially prevailed on the merits. The decision ignored both the important role environmental groups play in the interpretation and development of regulatory programs through litigation and the ability of the lower courts to determine when attorneys' fees were "appropriate." The Court, instead, focused on the adversarial nature of such groups and the traditional American …
New Jersey V. Epa, Nathan Borgford-Parnell
New Jersey V. Epa, Nathan Borgford-Parnell
Sustainable Development Law & Policy
No abstract provided.
The Evolving Scope Of Significant Effects On The Environment: The National Environmental Policy Act And Climate Change, Chris Mcchesney
The Evolving Scope Of Significant Effects On The Environment: The National Environmental Policy Act And Climate Change, Chris Mcchesney
Sustainable Development Law & Policy
No abstract provided.
The Global Warming Case: Massachusetts V. Environmental Protection Agency , Meryl Eschen Mills
The Global Warming Case: Massachusetts V. Environmental Protection Agency , Meryl Eschen Mills
Sustainable Development Law & Policy
No abstract provided.
Green Mountain Chrysler Plymouth Dodge Jeep V. Crombie, Addie Haughey
Green Mountain Chrysler Plymouth Dodge Jeep V. Crombie, Addie Haughey
Sustainable Development Law & Policy
No abstract provided.