Documents
Briefs, oral arguments, agency decisions and the Federal Register.
10,000+ results
0.78s
Appendix — Worthington Corp. v. Lease Management, Inc.
Supreme Court brief · Appendix · 1966
The regulator was then taken into the shop, cleaned (46a) and mae pe by Mr. Wood and Mr. Lewis (46a). … We thus not only have a question of negligent design, we have a situation where the plaintiff itgelf installed the layout, and where, during a period of four months, intiff Worthington actually saw
383 U.S. 937Amicus Curiae Brief — Port of Tacoma, et al., Petitioners v. Puget Soundkeeper Alliance
Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Oct 28, 2024
arising under both the Clean Water Act and state law. … a permit are significantly lower than under the Clean Water Act.
Motion Amicus Curiae Brief — American Fruit Growers, Inc. v. Brogdex Co.
Supreme Court brief · Motion Amicus Curiae Brief · 1931
Cleaning and ginning cotton does not * make the resulting cotton a manufacture of cot- * ~ ton’? … Westinghouse Air- Brake Co. v. New, York Air-Brake Co., 59. Fed. O81, 593.7”.
283 U.S. 1Joint Appendix — United States v. Scheffer
Supreme Court brief · Joint Appendix · 1998
FODREA WALTER DELLINGER Major, United States Air Force Acting Solicitor General Appellate Defense Division Department of Justice Bolling Air Force Base Washington, D.C. 20530-0001 Washington, D.C. … Air- man Scheffer had every reason to remain clean and to 65 help the OSI, and to get the help from them that they kind of indicated that he would get in return.
523 U.S. 303Supplemental Brief — Vey v. Ridge
Supreme Court brief · Supplemental Brief · 1999
Vey has been fighting to CLEAN-UP the United States (with appropriate prosecutions of these blatant criminals), RESTORE law and order in the US. especially that of our U.S. … The plaintiff further claims that she is therefore unable to "...complete her mission of Univesal Crime Clean-up, Law & Order Restoration, et cetera.” and ©...can not (sic) complete her mission of a
528 U.S. 818Amicus Curiae Brief — South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians
Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2003
THE CLEAN WATER ACT AUTHORIZES STATE PROGRAMS TO ADDRESS NONPOINT SOURCES OF POLLUTION NOT COVERED BY THE NPDES PROGRAM. A. … to improve soil, water, air, wetlands and wildlife management.
539 U.S. 957Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Motel 6 Operating L. P. v. Huttinger
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 2000
Delta Air Lines, Inc., 6 F.3d 632, 644 (9th Cir. 1993). … have been cleaned within a month.
530 U.S. 1241Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Adams v. Driscoll
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 2000
The question at hand is whether the petitioner violated the Clean Water Act. Opinions are conflicting. … DID ADAMS’ DISCHARGES FALL WITHIN THE SCOPE OF PROHIBITED POLLUTANT DISCHARGES UNDER THE CLEAN WATER ACT?
529 U.S. 1108Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Oct 23, 2024
Sunstein, Is the Clean Air Act Unconstitutional?, 98 MICH. L. REV. 303 (1999) ........................................ 11 Cass R. Sunstein, Nondelegation Canons, 67 U. CHI. L. … Sunstein, Is the Clean Air Act Unconstitutional?, 98 MICH. L.
Amicus Curiae Brief — Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn.
Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1992
The Federal Register notice explained that the standard applies to (1) clean-up operations at uncontrolled hazard- ous waste disposal sites that have been identified 4 for clean-up by a governmental … Delta Air Lines, Inc., 463 U.S. 85, 96-97 (1983). See also 8S. Bokat & H.
505 U.S. 88Petitioners Reply in Brief — Arrow Transportation Co. v. Southern Railway Co.
Supreme Court brief · Petitioners Reply in Brief · 1963
Lovuis-San FrRANcIsco RAILWAY COMPANY,’ a corporation, Srapoarp Air Lines RAtLRoAD COMPANY, a corporation, Respondents ] / 4 ee PETITIONERS’ BRIEF IN REPLY TO BRIEF OF SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY … Eventually they swept the waters clean of the competing craft, except on the ocean and the Gulf, and even there the competition was greatly weakened.
372 U.S. 658Petition for A Writ of Certiorari — Texas Water Conservation Ass'n v. Department of the Interior
Supreme Court brief · Petition for A Writ of Certiorari · 1992
Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seqg.), sec. 309 of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7609, and E.O. 11514 (Mar. 5, 1970, as amended by E.O. 11991, May 24, 1977 … Part 1508 (1986) PART 1508:--TERMINOLOGY AND INDEX AUTHORITY: NEPA, the Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), sec. 309 of the Clean Air Act, as amended
506 U.S. 823Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Bolkcom v. Carborundum Co.
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1976
I certainly must apologize for the form of some of those comments. … “He didn’t pre- pare the applications involved” period.
425 U.S. 951Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Atlas Van Lines, Inc. v. Lewis (No. 08-901)
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 2008
New England Hood & Duct Cleaning Co., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1022, at *2 (E.D. Pa. 2000). … It also does not include inspections that are limited to one or more of the following: wood destroying insects, wells, septic systems, air and air quality, and environmental hazards.
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · Apr 22, 2022
included the coordination of AdBlue tank sizes and refill ranges, as well as the exchange of assumed average AdBlue-consumption for their new diesel passenger car models with SCR-system in the relevant period … The Proceedings Below Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated § 1 of the Sherman Act in three ways.
Opposition Brief — Simpson Paper (Vermont) Co. v. Department of Environmental Conservation
Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1993
The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed a proper exercise of state authority under § 401 of the Clean Water Act. 3. … I, Arts. 4, 7 and/or 9.... 25 Clean Water Act, Section 401, 33 U.S.C. §1341(a) . .1, 46 Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1341(d) .....------+++- 48 40 C.F.R. §131.3(b)......-. eee cece eee rece ener eres
507 U.S. 970Application — United States, et al., Petitioners v. Texas, et al.
Supreme Court brief · Application · Jul 8, 2022
Air Regul. Grp. v. … Importantly, “the APA’s notice and comment exemptions must be narrowly construed.” Id. (cleaned up).
Respondents Brief — Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.
Supreme Court brief · Respondents Brief · 2006
Levitt, 493 U.S. 155 (1990) 00000000. 11 Tevas Air Corp. v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n Int'l, 1989 ~ WL 146414 (S.D. Fla. July 14, 1989) ........0000.00000..... 42 United States v. … See Commercial Cleaning, 271 F.3d at 384. c.
547 U.S. 451Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Eimco Corp. v. Peterson Filters & Engineering Co.
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1969
In the circumstances, the comments of the Court in Technograph Printed Circwits Ltd. v. … and the restricted right ‘‘for a period of one year from the date of the agreement’?
395 U.S. 963Opposition Brief — Malot v. Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1996
. § 103; and (3) Even if Petitioner’s claim was not invalid, the technology employed by Respondents in the single site clean up did not infringe that claim. … Respondent established that its process drew air through the soil, thereby causing liquid contaminants in the soil to evaporate: Movement of fresh air through the soil vented preformed vapors of
516 U.S. 1117
Ask Donna what matters in the record.
She can read the source against your case and show you exactly where the answer came from.