Home > Morris Polich & Purdy LLP > Legal Library

Legal Articles: Morris Polich & Purdy LLP

 







Document(s) published by this organization: 72


View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  
Show: results per page
Sort by:

Adobe PDFAppellate Court Endorses Averaging To Determine If Exposures Require Prop 65 Warning
Christopher G. Foster; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 21, 2015, previously published on April 29, 2015
In 2011, the Environmental Law Foundation (ELF) filed a complaint against Beech-Nut Nutrition Company and 15 other food manufacturers, alleging that the lead content of defendants’ products was sufficient to trigger the duty pursuant to Proposition 65 to provide warnings to consumers. The...

 

Adobe PDFCalifornia Court of Appeals Dismisses Petitioner’s Challenge to RWQCB’s California Court of Appeals Dismisses Petitioner’s Challenge to RWQCB’s TMDL Standards
Hubert T. Lee; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 21, 2015, previously published on April 29, 2015
On March 30, 2015, the Second District Court of Appeal in Conway v. State Water Resources Control Board rejected claims that the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) impermissibly established Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for McGrath Lake when it set TMDLs in terms of pollutant...

 

Adobe PDFCalifornia Court of Appeal Upholds Proposed Sacramento Kings Stadium Over CEQA Challenge
Hubert T. Lee; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 21, 2015, previously published on April 29, 2015
On February 18, 2015, California’s Third District Court of Appeal in Saltonstall et al. v. City of Sacramento upheld the City of Sacramento’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the proposed construction of the new Sacramento Kings’ basketball stadium in downtown...

 

Adobe PDFProposition 65 Amendment Seeks To Simplify Process For Determining Safe Harbors
Christopher G. Foster; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 20, 2015, previously published on April 29, 2015
Through the initiative process, California voters adopted the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, better known as Proposition 65. Proposition 65 prohibits any person, in the course of doing business, from knowingly and intentionally exposing any individual to a chemical known to...

 

Adobe PDFU.S. Supreme Court Affirms Amtrak’s Regulatory Authority
Christopher G. Foster; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 20, 2015, previously published on April 29, 2015
In 1970, Congress passed the Rail Passenger Service Act (RPSA), which was designed to aid in maintaining a national passenger railway system. The RPSA established the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, better known as Amtrak, which was intended to meet the national intercity railway needs. In...

 

Adobe PDFLittle Hocking Water Association, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company Determines Some Issues Where the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Clean Act Meet in a Way That May Make it Easier for Plaintiffs to Prevail on Certain Claims
Summer L. Nastich; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 20, 2015, previously published on April 29, 2015
Plaintiff Little Hocking Water Association (“Little Hocking”) sued Defendant E.I. du Pont Nemours (“DuPont”) on a variety of theories related to the release of considerable volumes of perfluorooctanoic acid (“C8”). The one addressed here is the claim for Imminent...

 

Adobe PDFIs It or Is It Not a Water of the United States? A Complex Issue that Both Provides for Federal Jurisdiction and Bars Such a Jurisdiction Claim
Summer L. Nastich; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 20, 2015, previously published on April 29, 2015
The court’s ruling in Precon Development Corp. Inc. v. Army Corps of Engineers, --- Fed. Appx. --- (2015) WL 1020693, helps to answer this question. The central issue before the court was whether the United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) had sufficiently bolstered the administrative...

 

Adobe PDFImproper Agricultural Manure Usage or Storage May Be Subject to RCRA Liability
Hubert T. Lee; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
April 22, 2015, previously published on March 23, 2015
On January 14, 2015, the Eastern District of Washington in Cmty. Ass'n for Restoration of the Env't, Inc. v. Cow Palace, LLC, No. 13-CV-3016-TOR, 2015 WL 199345, at *41 (E.D. Wash. Jan. 14, 2015) ruled that dairy farms were liable under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act...

 

Adobe PDFChallenging the Innocent Landowner Defense Under CERCLA - Coppola v. Smith Reinforces the Importance of ASTM Compliance as Part of a Commercial Land Purchaser’s Environmental Due Diligence
Hubert T. Lee; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
April 22, 2015, previously published on March 23, 2015
In Coppola v. Smith, No. 1:11-CV-01257-AWI, 2015 WL 224730, (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2015), a federal court in the Eastern District of California denied a defendant commercial property purchaser’s “innocent landowners” defense to a claim for cost recovery under CERCLA, finding there...

 

Adobe PDFCourt Holds that Motion to Dismiss Is an Ineffective Tool to Address Allegations that Exceed the Scope of Pre-Litigation Notice Under the Clean Water Act
Ryan C. McKim; Morris Polich & Purdy LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
April 22, 2015, previously published on March 23, 2015
Before filing a Clean Water Act action, a plaintiff must provide the potential defendant with a “prelitigation notice” that tells the target precisely what it purportedly did wrong and when. However, in California Communities Against Toxics v. Armorcast Products Co., Inc., the U.S....

 


View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next