City of Martinez v. Texaco Trading & Transportation, Inc.
353 F.3d 758 (9th Cir. 2003)
The City of Martinez, California (the City) filed seventeen claims against Texaco Trading and Transportation, Inc. (Texaco) for damages to Mococo Marsh resulting from oil spilled from a Texaco oil pipeline. The district court found the City's suit barred by... {Continue reading}

Friends of the Cowlitz v. FERC
253 F.3d 1161 (9th Cir. 2001), amended by 282 F.3d 609 (9th Cir. 2002)
Two citizen groups, Friends of the Cowlitz and CPR-Fish, appealed an order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) dismissing their request for enforcement action against the city of Tacoma (Tacoma). The Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal because FERC's prosecutorial... {Continue reading}

In re the Exxon Valdez
270 F.3d 1215 (9th Cir. 2001)
In the latest chapter of the fallout resulting from the Exxon Valdez's infamous spill, Exxon Corporation and Exxon Shipping Company (Exxon) appealed a jury award of $5 billion in punitive damages to plaintiff fishermen, landowners, and others adversely affected... {Continue reading}

Nathan Kimmel, Inc. v. DowElanco
275 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2002)
The Ninth Circuit held that a plaintiff's state law claim for damages based on unenforced violations of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)[1] was preempted because allowing such claims would interfere with agency discretion and unduly burden regulated... {Continue reading}

ONRC Action v. Columbia Plywood, Inc.
286 F.3d 1137 (9th Cir. 2002)
ONRC Action and Klamath Forest Alliance (collectively ONRC) brought a citizen lawsuit against Columbia Plywood, Inc. (Columbia) under the Clean Water Act (CWA).[1] ONRC alleged that Columbia's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit was invalid because Columbia failed to... {Continue reading}

United States v. Morros
268 F.3d 695 (9th Cir. 2001)
In a suit surrounding the proposed nuclear waste repository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain, the United States sued the state of Nevada and the state engineer of Nevada because the defendants denied the plaintiff's water permit applications. The United States District... {Continue reading}