TITLE

Carson Harbor Village v. Unocal Corporation: Using Background Principles to Solve CERCLA's Ambiguities?

AUTHOR(S)
Ruiz-Esquide, Andrea
PUB. DATE
November 2003
SOURCE
Ecology Law Quarterly;2003, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p473
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Examines the case, Carson Harbor Village v. Unocal Corp., proposing the use of background principles to solve vague provisions of the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Legal background of the act; Facts of the case; Analysis of the court's decision in terms of legal and historical contexts.
ACCESSION #
11694188

 

Related Articles

  • FOREWORD. Garrison, Emma; Owley, Jessica // Ecology Law Quarterly;2003, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p395 

    Explores cases and changes in the U.S. environmental law.

  • The Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule: How Does the Greatest Reduction Become No Reduction? Stanfield, Sky // Ecology Law Quarterly;2004, Vol. 31 Issue 3, p563 

    In Sierra Club v. EPA the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the EPA had acted within the Clean Air Act's statutory mandate in promulgating the Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule despite the fact that the rule did not actual require any reduction in emission levels. By allowing an...

  • THEME AND VARIATIONS IN STATUTORY PRECLUSIONS AGAINST SUCCESSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS BY EPA AND CITIZENS. Miller, Jeffrey G. // Harvard Environmental Law Review;2004, Vol. 28 Issue 2, p401 

    Examines the device in citizen suit provisions. Environmental statute's enforcement provisions and their preclusions; Interpretation of preclusions in citizen suit provisions to implement their plain meanings; Doctrinal schism in interpreting citizen suit provisions and their preclusions.

  • NEW YORK V. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY: THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT PROVIDES CLARIFICATION ON THE EPA'S 2002 CLEAN AIR ACT RULING. Miller, Emily // University of Baltimore Journal of Environmental Law;Fall2005, Vol. 13 Issue 1, p101 

    The article presents an analysis on the case of New York versus the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in which the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit provided clarification on the EPA's 2002 Clean Air Act (CAA) ruling. The court upheld the EPA's...

  • New Cooling-Water Intake Is Low-Cost and Fish-Friendly. Armistead, Thomas F // ENR: Engineering News-Record;4/4/2005, Vol. 254 Issue 13, p17 

    The article reports that a new federal regulation for cooling-water-intake systems has powerplant operators shopping for solutions. A New York engineering firm has developed a system that it claims complies with the new regulation at a fraction of the cost of a new cooling tower and with none of...

  • States sue EPA over carbon dioxide emissions. Arias, Donya C. // Nation's Health;Aug2003, Vol. 33 Issue 6, p10 

    Reports on the move of three New England states to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 2003 in an effort to force the government to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Basis of the lawsuit; Dangers posed by global warming to the public; Provisions of the Clean Air Act.

  • Court tells EPA to rewrite emissions rule. Toloken, Steve // Plastics News;6/28/2004, Vol. 16 Issue 17, p11 

    A federal court has tossed out part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) emissions standards for PVC manufacturing plants, ruling that the agency failed to set limits for emissions of several hazardous air pollutants. The June 18 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...

  • Palazzolo v. Rhode Island: Revival of Penn Central and Implications for Environmental Regulation. Podolsky, Michael J. // Urban Lawyer;Spring2003, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p353 

    Provides information on the Palazzolo versus Rhode Island Supreme Court case, which focuses on the revival of Penn Central and its implications for environmental regulation in the U.S. Details of the case; Ruling made on the case; Overview of key regulatory takings cases.

  • AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER CO. V. CONNECTICUT. Brody, David R. // Harvard Environmental Law Review;2012, Vol. 36 Issue 1, p297 

    On June 20, 2011, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous and straightforward decision that the Clean Air Act displaces federal common law public nuisance claims against greenhouse gas emitters. The decision solidifies the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA")'s primacy, established in...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics