On April 2, 2025, California’s Fifth Appellate District issued a decision in Bring Back the Kern v. City of Bakersfield (April 2, 2025, F087487) (2025 WL 98443). The Court held the “self-executing” reasonableness requirement...more
On September 12, the Washington Supreme Court affirmed a Court of Appeals decision that declared the City of Sammamish––and all other municipalities enumerated under Revised Code of Washington 8.12.030––does not lose its...more
Last week, in what may or may not be the last round in the ongoing efforts by Michael and Chantell Sackett to build a house on wetlands in Idaho, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that: EPA reasonably determined...more
Earlier this week, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline. The Court did so with a two-sentence order stating that an opinion would follow. The order was issued hours after oral...more
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (“Court”) addressed in a January 21st opinion issues associated with a federal district court action in which the State of Louisiana alleged shore damage caused by waterways maintained by...more
The Court of Appeals of Wisconsin (“Court”) addressed in a November 26th opinion a dispute regarding the ownership of a pier and a wet boathouse. See DeSombre v. Bolderbuck, WL 6314826. The wet boathouse is described as...more
The Supreme Court of Missouri addressed in an April 30th opinion a riparian rights issue associated with an artificial body of water. See Incline Village Board of Trustees v. Elder, 2019 WL 1912218. The question considered...more
The Michigan Court of Appeals addressed in a January 16th opinion an action in which the Plaintiff sought to limit the rights of non-riparian lot owners to maintain a dock at the end of a dedicated private road abutting a...more
The Supreme Court issued a decision last week regarding which federal courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges to the 2015 Waters of the U.S. Rule....more
In July 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the state of Washington violated tribal treaty obligations by building and maintaining barrier culverts that block 1,000 linear miles of streams suitable...more
This Advisory briefly reports on some of the significant U.S. Supreme Court actions from January through June 2016 related to environmental and administrative law. ...more
Any plans to “substantially divert” water from a river or stream requires notification to the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, the California Court of Appeal found. In reversing a lower court’s decision that favored...more
On June 4, 2015, the Court of Appeal ruled that California Fish and Game Code section 1602 (“Section 1602”) unambiguously requires notification to the Department of Fish and Wildlife (“Department”) if an entity or individual...more
Under CEQA, a “trustee agency” is a “state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California” and “[t]he California Department of...more
In a short published opinion, the Second District Court of Appeal rejected federal Clean Water Act, state Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and CEQA challenges to a regional board’s Basin Plan Amendment establishing a...more
On March 30, 2015, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District upheld a novel, sediment-based total maximum daily load (TMDL) set by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) for McGrath...more