This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Tuesday sent lawsuits by six California cities and counties accusing ExxonMobil, ChevronCorp and other energy giants of fueling climate change back to state court after the US Supreme Court required the court reexamine the cases. Other lawsuits are still pending.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Monday tweaked the state's climate deception suit against Exxon Mobil Corp., Shell, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and BP to also target the oil and gas companies' "illegally obtained" profits under a recently enacted state law.
Lotte International America Corp. the manufacturer of Pocky, sued Lotte International America Corp., a rival snack-food company, after Lotte began selling a similar chocolate-coated biscuit snack. Lotte International America Corp. Ezaki Glico Co. Pocky and its competitor, as depicted in the cert petition. Ezaki Glico Co.,
An attorney for ChevronCorp. told a Delaware judge Tuesday that state attorneys vastly overreached when they sued dozens of fossil fuel companies for alleged misrepresentations and conspiracies aimed at obscuring their purported role in climate changes now threatening the coastal state.
The two most closely watched involve whether the Court should overrule its landmark decision in Chevron v. The Court’s Chevron decision established a bedrock principle of administrative law. Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. The post SCOTUS Poised to Decide Fate of Chevron Doctrine appeared first on Constitutional Law Reporter.
The administrative fees bankrupt businesses pay can be quite large in the cases of big companies. The question in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. The company also argues that suits broadly based on undisclosed “trends” may in practice be suits over a company’s failure to predict the future. In Chevron v.
Starting in 2017, cities, counties, and states across the United States have filed claims (see here and here ) in state courts against fossil fuel companies seeking redress for the climate harms their products have caused. ChevronCorp. Many of these cases asserted nuisance and other tort law claims.
Chevron Oronite Company LLC , No. Lotte International America Corp. , Janssen Pharmaceutica, N.V. , 21-202 ( NHK-Fintiv rule for denying petitions; appealability of IPR petition denial); Apple Inc. Optis Cellular Technology, LLC , No. 21-118 (mandamus review of IPR petition denial); Infineum USA L.P. Bongiorno v.
Army Corps of Engineer permits for construction of a portion of a proposed methanol refinery and export terminal in Washington (the Kalama Project). The court also held that the Corps violated NEPA by not considering the need to expand the regional gas pipeline system as a cumulative indirect effect of the project. 3:19-cv-06071 (W.D.
17, the justices will consider a broader question: whether to overrule (or at the very least limit) their 1984 decision in Chevron v. Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. 17) – Whether to overrule or limit the court’s 1984 decision in Chevron v. 17) – Whether to overrule or limit the court’s 1984 decision in Chevron v.
The US Supreme Court Monday declined to hear five appeals from fossil fuel companies requesting to have their cases moved from state to federal courts. The fossil fuel companies argued that because greenhouse gases travel between states, rather than remain within state boundaries, their emission falls under the purview of federal law.
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Parting company from his liberal colleague, Breyer wrote that he preferred to reach the same result on statutory grounds. Brown & Williamson Corp. More recently, Breyer wrote a powerful dissent from the Supreme Court’s holding in Free Enterprise Fund v.
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) on Monday refused to hear the appeals of multiple oil companies alleging that a negligence lawsuit against them violates the US Constitution’s separation of powers and federal common law.
Charleston, SC filed suit against fossil fuel companies alleging their responsibility for “devastating” climate change impacts. In Baltimore’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies, Supreme Court Agreed to Consider Scope of Appellate Review of Remand Order. Army Corps of Engineers , No. Source: Khanrak ). and non-U.S.
They include former Virgin America CEO David Cush; a former administrator at the Federal Railroad Administration, Sarah Feinberg; former Marriott International Group President Dave Grissen; former WestJet CEO Gregg Saretsky; former ChevronCorp. On the flip side, Elliott sent a message to companies everywhere.
New Jersey Federal Court Remanded Hoboken’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies to State Court. On September 8, 2021, a federal district court in New Jersey granted the City of Hoboken’s motion to remand to state court its climate change lawsuit against oil and gas companies. ChevronCorp. —in Exxon Mobil Corp. ,
Portland Pipe Line Corp. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) approval of the Keystone XL pipeline project under the reissued Nationwide Permit 12 (NWP 12) for pipeline and utility projects. The court noted that the administrative record currently documented the Corps’ decision to reissue NWP 12 in 2017. 18-2118 (1st Cir.
Fourth Circuit Declined to Stay Remand Order in Baltimore’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies; Companies Sought Stay from Supreme Court. On the same day, the companies filed an application for a stay in the U.S. On September 13, the companies filed an expedited motion for stay pending appeal in the First Circuit.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court order remanding to state court the State of Rhode Island’s lawsuit that seeks relief from oil and gas companies for climate change injuries allegedly caused by the companies’ actions. Tenth Circuit Ordered Coal Company to Stop Preparation for Mining in Colorado Roadless Area.
In Baltimore’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies, Supreme Court Held that Appellate Review of Remand Order Extends to All Grounds for Removal. The Court declined to review the companies’ other grounds for removal, finding that the “wiser course” was to allow the Fourth Circuit to address them in the first instance.
ExxonMobil Corp. Army Corps of Engineers had failed to analyze climate impacts and that floodplain and coastal loss impacts had not been considered as part of the required “public interest” analysis. Army Corps of Engineers , No. Based Fossil Fuel Companies Filed Motions to Dismiss New York City’s Climate Change Lawsuit.
Army Corps of Engineers violated NEPA and failed to take concerns about impacts on waters of the United States into account. Army Corps of Engineers , No. On January 8, the Court granted the Acting Solicitor General’s motion for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae in support of the companies. ChevronCorp.
Circuit also rejected two arguments by coal companies against the ACE Rule. Army Corps of Engineers permits for the pipeline project. Army Corps of Engineers , No. Exxon Mobil Corp. , 28, 2021); ChevronCorp. Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. 1:20-cv-03817 (D.D.C. On January 19, 2021, the U.S.
Supreme Court denied fossil fuel companies’ petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Ninth Circuit’s decision reversing the district court’s 2018 denial of Oakland’s and San Francisco’s motions to remand their climate change nuisance cases to California state court. ChevronCorp. Army Corps of Engineers , No.
States and Coal Company Sought Review of D.C. The second petition was filed by a coal mining company. The company argued that the D.C. Like the states, the company contended that Supreme Court had already recognized the critical importance of this question when it stayed the Clean Power Plan. In re Exxon Mobil Corp. ,
Second Circuit Rejected New York City’s State Law Climate Claims Against Oil Companies. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of New York City’s lawsuit seeking climate change damages from oil companies. The Second Circuit’s decision largely followed the reasoning of the district court’s 2018 decision.
Hawai‘i Federal Court Sent Honolulu’s and Maui’s Climate Cases Back to State Court; Fossil Fuel Companies Appealed. The federal district court for the District of Hawai‘i remanded cases brought by the City and County of Honolulu and the County of Maui seeking to hold fossil fuel companies liable for climate change-related damages.
Exxon Mobil Corp. , Pipeline Company Voluntarily Dismissed Appeal in Case Challenging South Portland Ordinance. Portland Pipe Line Corp. In the Tenth Circuit, both fossil fuel companies and local government entities filed supplemental briefs on July 16. State of Washington ex rel. Haskell v. 98719-0 (Wash. Biden , No.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content