TITLE

Emissions case may head to Supreme Court

AUTHOR(S)
Dawson, Brad
PUB. DATE
June 2007
SOURCE
Rubber & Plastics News;6/11/2007, Vol. 36 Issue 23, p3
SOURCE TYPE
Trade Publication
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article reports that Continental Carbon Co. plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court against its latest court defeat in an ongoing emissions damage case. The U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, in Montgomery, Alabama, refused Continental Carbon's request for a rehearing of its appeal of the case, in which four plaintiffs alleged damage to their property from the company's carbon black plant in Phenix City, Alabama.
ACCESSION #
25426787

 

Related Articles

  • High court rejects Concarb plea. Dawson, Brad // Rubber & Plastics News;7/14/2008, Vol. 37 Issue 25, p3 

    The article reports on a lawsuit filed by the city of Columbus, Georgia and individuals Owen Ditchfield and John Tharpe against carbon black producer Continental Carbon Co. in August 2001. The lawsuit alleged that property owned by the plaintiffs were damaged by emissions from Continental's...

  • FEDERAL CONTROL OF CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS: WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS? REITZE JR., ARNOLD W. // Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review;2009, Vol. 36 Issue 1, p1 

    The U.S. Supreme Court in Massachusetts v. EPA held that carbon dioxide is a pollutant under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and remanded the case to EPA. The Agency must decide whether CO2 emissions contribute to climate change. If the Agency responds affirmatively, it must meet other requirements of...

  • Anticompetitive activities may not give rise to antitrust claim. Senterfitt, Barry // Managed Healthcare Executive;Jan2007, Vol. 17 Issue 1, p17 

    The article focuses on the limitation of private medical practices in pursuing antitrust claims under the doctrine made by the U.S. Supreme Court. The court has long admonished that federal antitrust law is not designed to protect businesses from the workings of the market, but rather to protect...

  • Concarb loses appeal $20.7 million verdict. Dawson, Brad // Rubber & Plastics News;4/2/2007, Vol. 36 Issue 18, p21 

    The article reports that a three-judge appellate panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, has affirmed a $20.7 million verdict in a pollution case involving the emission of carbon black from a Continental Carbon Co. plant in Alabama. The appellate court upheld a 2004 trial court...

  • What's in a name? Jacoby, David // Travel Law Quarterly;Sep2010, Vol. 2 Issue 3, p187 

    The article reports on the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which revived a claim of an injured passenger against a cruise ship line. It notes that although at first the passenger sued the wrong party, her claim related back to the initial claim when she later sued the correct party. It claims...

  • Heating Up. TRENT, ASHLEY // InsideCounsel;Apr2011, Vol. 22 Issue 232, p18 

    The article discusses the court case Connecticut v. American Electric Power (AEP) wherein six electric power corporations were sued for allegedly contributing to global warming, to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in April 2011. According to plaintiffs, among environmental and personal...

  • A Changing Climate of Litigation. Dahl, Richard // Environmental Health Perspectives;Apr2007, Vol. 115 Issue 4, pA204 

    This article discusses the trend towards climate change litigation. According to the author, organizations like the Sierra Club are suing corporations to block their greenhouse gas emissions and states are suing the government for failure to regulate them. In Massachusetts et al. V....

  • High court case to shape global warming litigation. WOJCIK, JOANNE // Business Insurance;12/13/2010, Vol. 44 Issue 48, p1 

    This article discusses the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case which accused coal-burning utilities of causing beach erosion, droughts and floods. Environmental groups claimed that carbon dioxide emissions from the utilities led to beach erosion, droughts and floods. The court made...

  • High Court Lets Baldwin Ruling Stand. Bell, Allison // National Underwriter / Life & Health Financial Services;11/22/2010, Vol. 114 Issue 22, p9 

    The article reports on the refusal of U.S. Supreme Court to take the suit filed by Steve Baldwin and Pacific Justice Institute against Kathleen Sebelius and colleagues in opposition to the Affordable Care Act.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

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

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics