Documents

Opposition Brief — Roehsler v. Middlesex County Health Department

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 2003

These businesses involve services related to automotive, trucking, electrical, cleaning, air conditioning and fabrication. … The inspectors will be members of the County Health Department and derive authority from the Solid Waste Management Act (N.J.S.A. 13:1E-1 et seg.) via the County Environmental Health Act.

Appendix — Eastern Pilots Merger Committee v. Continental Airlines, Inc

Supreme Court brief · Appendix · 2002

Specifically, the Court stated: The injunction surely obliged Kovacs to clean up the site. … In late January 1986, after an impasse, the NMB declared a mandatory thirty-day “cooling off” period under the Rail- way Labor Act (RLA), after which both the pi- lots and the carrier could engage

Appendix — CBS Inc. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

Supreme Court brief · Appendix · 1988

Nobody cleans house as selectively as Radutzky did. … Rather the matter was one for argument by the parties to the jury. 90a There was also evidence submitted that the broadcasts at issue were aired during a “sweeps” period, a period when the number

Amicus Curiae Brief — Arkansas v. Oklahoma

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1991

The American Paper Institute is a non-profit trade as- sociation whose members include companies which account formance with the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251- 1387 (1988).* Champion International … The succinctly-stated objective of the Clean Water Act is “to restore and main- tain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.”” CWA § 101(a).

Amicus Curiae Brief — The ERISA Industry Committee, Petitioner v. City of Seattle, Washington

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Feb 18, 2022

controverted, must yield to [the acts of Congress].” … Delta Air Lines, Inc., 463 U.S. 85, 95–98 (1983)) (emphasis added).

Opposition Brief — Jenkins v. Missouri

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1988

Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air, 107 S.Ct. 3078 (1987) (hereinafter “Delaware Valley II’). … In Delaware Valley II, plaintiff had obtained an award of attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 7604(d), i.e., section 304(d) of the Clean Air Act, for the work of their at- torneys in securing the implementation

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — United States v. Villegas

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1994

Navigating the Clean Water Act. … Jd. at Comment.

Opposition Brief — Appalachian Power Co. v. Environmental Protection Agency

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 2001

Air Act when it considered a cost factor in the determination of significant contribution under Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Act. … To the contrary, this case involves the ordinary exercise of discretion by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) in implementing a statutory provision of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Town of Rye v. Skinner

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1991

" See, e.g., the citizens * io se suit provisions of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §7604. te Scalia at 385. 45 important aspect of that common law. … tion of the comment period.

Opposition Brief — Hughes Tool Co. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1973

(Amicus brief, pp. 15-16) (emphasis added) The CAB is without jurisdiction under the Federal Avia- tion Act over either the acquisition of equipment by air carriers or their financing. … parable ventures during the same period.

Petition — Outboard Marine Corp. v. Illinois

Supreme Court brief · Petition · 1981

The Act provides for the adoption of water quality standards by states, and their review by U.S. EPA. 33 U.S.C. $1313(a). The states were directed to periodically review these standards. … der the Clean Water Act, and OMC’s NPDES permit. B.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ v. Federal Communications Commission

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1988

Section > a - 24 = H24(T), 44 i ee » O44(1) (Sul i) = = 5 = = ‘ mmunications Act 2 15-4 +i Ls. yy 10 f , . Omnibus Copyright Act of 19.6. Sector 1] . … Even if it were writing on a clean slate, the D.C. Circuit’s most recent interpretation of the O’Brien test is at best debatable.

Reply Brief — Utility Water Water Act Group Group v. Riverkeeper, Inc. (Nos. 07-597, 07-588, 07-589)

Supreme Court brief · Reply Brief · 2009

The Structure and History of the Clean Water Act Do Not Support III GERI 6. cesniccistcccpnensisdeeseeunnnbl 20 iv The Opinions of Congressional Staff Who Neither Vote on a Bill Nor Express their … No §316(a)-style variance was needed, ¥ Clean Water Act §§301, 306, 33 U.S.C. §§1311, 1316.

Opposition Brief — Polmar Fisheries, Inc. v. Hurlburt

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1999

As of that date, there were at least seven crewmembers aboard for whom Hurlburt was cooking, and, in addition to her cooking function, Hurlburt cleaned staterooms. … Petitioner amply aired its concerns, evidence and testimony on seamanship and related issues, as to Polmar and/or Northland.

Opposition Brief — Cris Realms, Inc. v. United States

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 2001

V ' 7,20 Clean Water Act of 1977, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seg.: § 404, 33 U.S.C. 1344 3 § 404(b), 33 U.S.C. 1344(b) 19 Flood Control Act of 1971, 33 U.S.C. 701 4 Rivers and Harbors Appropriations Act … of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 403, or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, 33 U.S.C. 13844.

Appendix — Ray v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

Supreme Court brief · Appendix · 1978

All tankers have to clean tanks periodically for internal inspection and repairs. … Lockheed Air Terminal, 8S ERC 1321 (U.S. 1973) supports this preemption conclusion.

Opposition Brief — Village of Los Ranchos de Albuquerque v. Stone

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1992

AAS ae OTE NP IDS 7 Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 ef seq. ..................cc0000es 4 BS EITC. … In addition to their NEPA claim, petitioners alleged violations of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq., the National Historic Preservation

Petition for A Writ of Certiorari — Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad v. Woodrow

Supreme Court brief · Petition for A Writ of Certiorari · 1954

Asa result it was neces- sary for the fireman, Robert Boyd Jr., to periodically “clean the fire” by opening and closing the engine grates, and remov- ing the clinkers (R. 23, 24). … Plaintiff does not claim to have experienced any difficulty in cleaning the first three sets of grates. He then proceeded to clean the fourth set of grates (R. 28).

Appendix — C.P. Chemical Co. v. Commissioner of Public Health

Supreme Court brief · Appendix · 1983

It is act submitted under oath. … Since soving so the Cape, he had stopped taking asthsa medication because the air was clean. Be told she UFFI salesperscn of his asthca and was assured that the éssuiation is non-texic. . : 3 7.

Respondents Brief — Ford Motor Co. (Chicago Stamping Plant) v. NLRB

Supreme Court brief · Respondents Brief · 1979

Employees may not leave the plant during the 22-minute rest periods, and it is not feasible for them to leave during their lunch period. … How much will it cost the employee and/or employer to have this portion, of that quality, served with a given, clean efficiency?