Daily Archives: November 25, 2012

Case Summary: Montana Department of Natural Resources & Conservation v. Abbco Investments, LLC, 2012 MT 187, 366 Mont. 120, 285 P.3d 532.

By William Fanning Defendant landowners claimed possession of riparian lands bordering the Missouri River.  However, the State of Montana proved these lands had emerged vertically from the bed of the Missouri after Statehood and thus were the property of the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Case Summary: Native Village of Kivalina IRA Council v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 687 F.3d 1216 (9th Cir. 2012).

By Clare Hansen In this case, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the United States Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Appeals Board’s order denying review of petitioners’ Native Village of Kivalina IRA Council (Kivalina)’s challenge of a permit issued to the mining company … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Case Summary: Fellows v. Office of Water Commission for the Perry v. Beattie Decree, 2012 MT 169, 365 Mont. 540, 285 P.3d 448.

By Jack Connors The issue of whether two adjoining bodies of water are connected in such a way that a change in flow in one will affect the flow in the other is a complex question.  In Fellows v. Office … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Case Summary: Texas v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 690 F.3d 670, 2012 WL 3264558, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 16898 (5th Cir. Aug. 13, 2012).

By Ali Guio In Texas v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated an Environmental Protection Agency rule disapproving Texas’s State Implementation Plan for compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards under the Clean … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Case Summary: State v. Continental Insurance Company, 281 P.3d 1000 (Cal. 2012).

By John Newman The California Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals and adopted an “all-sums-with-stacking” indemnity principle in the context of a large hazardous waste site cleanup.  The court employed this principle because of the plain language of the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment