Podcast - Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. EPA: The Intersection of Constitutional and Environmental Law
SCOTUS Clean Air Act Cases: What’s New?
Rewriting the Rules: The Supreme Court's Landmark Decision on Clean Water Act Permits
On-Demand Webinar | Regulatory Uncertainty and Linear Infrastructure Projects: Where Are We and What’s Ahead?
PFAS: Increasing Regulations and Managing Legal Liability
On-Demand Webinar | Linear Infrastructure Redux: Adapting Your Projects to Meet the New Regulatory Climate
The Current and Future Landscapes of EPA Criminal and Civil Enforcement
On-Demand Webinar | The New NEPA Regulations: A Practical Guide to What You Need to Know
One-on-One with David Fotouhi, Acting General Counsel at the EPA
Volatile Times in Vapor Intrusion Regulation: A Legal and Technical Update
[WEBINAR] Fairly (or Unfairly?) Traceable: Are Discharges Through Groundwater Subject to the Clean Water Act?
[WEBINAR] Update on the California Environmental Quality Act: What’s New for 2018
In Citizens for a Better Eureka v. City of Eureka (2025) __ Cal. App. 5th __, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment dismissing a CEQA action that challenged an approval for the redevelopment of a City of...more
In an opinion filed May 14, and later ordered published on June 11, 2025, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 3) affirmed a judgment dismissing a CEQA action challenging an approval for a City parking lot...more
On May 19, the Eastern District of New York (the Court) dismissed claims brought by the Town of Oyster Bay, New York (the Town) under Section 20(a)(1) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)1 and for public nuisance...more
On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a pivotal decision addressing the timing of contribution claims under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA),...more
On April 25, the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division reversed a trial court’s order dismissing the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s (NJDEP) complaint as time-barred in NJDEP v. Desai. The ruling...more
What You Need to Know in a Minute or Less - Effectively defending emerging contaminant litigation requires counsel capable of navigating extremely complex scientific issues related to causation, while also not losing sight of...more
As litigation involving per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) continues to rise, manufacturers of PFAS-containing products face significant legal and financial risks. Plaintiffs, including individuals, communities,...more
In Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Benito (2024) 104 Cal.App.5th 22, the Court of Appeal held that the statute of limitations for two CEQA challenges did not begin to run until the Board of Supervisors had...more
A Court of Appeal held that the CEQA statute of limitations period does not begin to run after the filing of an initial notice of determination if the project is appealed. Central for Biological Diversity v. County of San...more
Petitioner’s challenge to a Specific Plan, which was filed before that plan was adopted, was barred as premature, and its belated attempt to amend its petition after the Specific Plan had been adopted was barred by the...more
In the first reported interpretation of a 2021 amendment to CEQA’s statute of limitations provisions, the First District Court of Appeal addressed “whether an action against a lead agency must be dismissed–despite being filed...more
The Court of Appeal held that a CEQA challenge to a decision approving removal of trees adjacent to PG&E gas pipelines was time-barred because an agreement to toll the statute of limitations did not include PG&E, which was an...more
The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has largely affirmed a District Court order finding that Ameren Missouri violated the NSR provisions of the Clean Air Act in making major modifications to its Rush Island facility. The...more
Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled that only settlements that explicitly resolve liability under CERCLA trigger the contribution provisions of section 113 of CERCLA. I have previously commented on the Court’s tendency to...more
The rhetoric of enforcement under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-75, plays well in public. The government seeks “cleanup” and makes “the polluter pay.”...more
On July 23, in MPM Silicones, LLC v. Union Carbide Corp., No. 17-3468(L), 17-3669(XAP), slip op., -- F.3d -- (2d Cir. 2020), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the District Court’s dismissal of...more
A court of appeal has rejected Coastal Act and CEQA challenges to the Coastal Commission’s approval of expansions at the San Diego Convention Center. San Diego Navy Broadway Complex Coalition v. California Coastal Commission,...more
The Appellate Division, Second Department, recently issued a decision that appears to be a departure from prior precedent and is certain to create confusion with respect to when to commence an Article 78 claim challenging a...more
I know that pointing out CERCLA’s stupidity has something of a dog bites man quality, but sometimes Superfund’s stupidity bears repeating. Today’s exhibit? New York v. Next Millenium Realty, in which Judge Feuerstein held –...more