Documents

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Jacoby Burns, Petitioner v. United States

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · Jan 26, 2019

SO WE HAVE THE ATTEMPTED THREATS, ACT, OR BEGINNING OF THREATS AND WE ALSO ACTUALLY HAVE ACTS OF THREATS -- ACT OF VIOLENCE. EXCUSE ME. … IN FEDERAL COURT BECAUSE THEY ARE TRYING TO CLEAN UP A SPECIFIC AREA.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — City of Edgerton v. General Casualty Co.

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1995

The site was licensed and periodically inspected by the WDNR. (R. 63, ¥ 2.) … App. 1991) (citing Comment, Liability of Landowner for Pollution of Percolating Waters, 39 MAaArRQ. L.

Record and brief — Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker

Supreme Court brief · Record and brief · 2008

Exxon Shipping pled guilty to one count each of violating the Clean Water Act, the Refuse Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. … Exxon Shipping pled guilty to one count each of violating the Clean Water Act, the Refuse Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Green v. Donahoe, 135 S. Ct. 1892 (2015) (No. 14-613)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2015

In 1989, the EEOC invited comment on whether the time period should be lengthened. 54 Fed. Reg. 45,747, 45,749 (Oct. 31, 1989). … The comment period ended in April 2015.

Petition — Andrulis v. United States

Supreme Court brief · Petition · 1980

EPA, 484 F.2d 1331 (1st Cir. 1973), that an award of attorney’s fees against the fed- eral government was authorized under § 304(d) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7604. … EPA, 484 F.2d 1331 (1st Cir. 1973), the First Circuit held that Section 304(d) of the Clean Air Act, now codified at 42 U.S.C. § 7604(d) (Supp.

Joint Appendix Vol I — Fiore v. White (No. 98-942)

Supreme Court brief · Joint Appendix Vol I · 2001

period of time. … for civil and criminal penalties under this act may be com- menced at any time within a period of 20 years from the date the offense is discovered.

Opposition — Industrial Union Dept., AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Institute

Supreme Court brief · Opposition · 1980

Goodrich Comments (June 27, 1977), Ex - 3; Rub- ber Manufacturers Association Comments (June 27, 1977), Ex. 6-59, at 1, 3; Firestone Comments (June 27, 1977), Ex. 6-48. … '6 Statement of Tyler (SOHIO), Tr. at 1815-1818; Rubber Man- ufacturers Association Comments (June 27, 1977), Ex. 6-59; Fire- stone Comments (June 27, 1977), Ex. 6-48; Du Pont Comments (June 27,

Reply Brief — Friends of Earth v. Laidlaw Environmental Services

Supreme Court brief · Reply Brief · 2000

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Congress intended to grant citizens standing to sue under the Clean Water Act to the full extent permitted by the Constitution. … CONGRESS INTENDED THAT CITIZENS HAVE STANDING TO SUE UNDER THE CLEAN WATER ACT TO THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE CONSTITUTION The text of the Clean Water Act permits suit by “any citizen,” which

Supplemental Brief — Jody Lombardo, et al., Petitioners v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Supplemental Brief · Apr 29, 2021

Still, they continued to press into his back as “he attempted to lift his body up” for air and said: “It hurts. Stop.” App. 36a. … Presented with a clean vehicle to resolve the conflict on the constitutionality of a police tactic that continues to cause so many unnecessary deaths, this Court should not sit idly by.

Appendix A — Vazquez-Valentin v. Santiago-Diaz

Supreme Court brief · Appendix A · 2006

The mayor’s alleged comment about “cleaning house” also is not sufficient to sustain plaintiffs burden. … Indeed, Vazquez’s testimony regarding Santiago’s “cleaning house” comment is even less forceful than the plaintiff's testimony in Figueroa-Serrano.

Amicus Brief for the United States — Ohio v. Kovacs

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Brief for the United States · 1983

Initially, the court ordered Kovacs himself to clean up the dumpsite. … P.R. 1979) (vacating bankruptcy court order that stayed enforcement of Clean Air Act regulations against debtor’s quarry operations) .

Application — Department of Education, et al., Petitioners v. Myra Brown, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Application · Dec 2, 2022

First, they argue that Plaintiffs could not have suffered a procedural deprivation based on the lack of a notice-and-comment period because the HEROES Act expressly exempts the APA’s notice-and-comment … (quoting Utility Air, 573 U. S., at 324).

Respondents Brief — W. Clark Aposhian, Petitioner v. Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Respondents Brief · Nov 3, 2021

et seq. .......... 9 Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.: 42 U.S.C. 7413(c)(1) (1982) ............................................. 26 42 U.S.C. 7502(a)(1) (1982) ................................... … Indeed, that was true in Chevron itself, in which the Court deferred to an agency’s interpretation of the term “stationary source” for purposes of a permitting requirement in the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Joseph R. Biden, Jr., President of the United States, et al., Petitioners v. Sierra Club, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · Nov 17, 2020

[and] the Clean Water Act.” … Similarly, because the Clean Air Act would otherwise require compliance with certain state air pollution requirements, see, e.g., 42 U.S.C. §§ 7418(a), 7506(c)(1), setting aside the Clean Air Act likewise

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC, et al., Petitioners v. Renewable Fuels Association, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · Sep 4, 2020

Overview of the RFS In 2005, and then again in 2007, Congress amended the Clean Air Act to include the present-day RFS pro­ gram. See 42 U.S.C. § 7545(o). … On the contrary, Congress knows how to incorporate time limits when it creates exemptions and has done so in other amendments to the Clean Air Act.

Transcript of Record — Duplate Corp. v. Triplex Safety Glass Co.

Supreme Court brief · Transcript of Record · 1936

Does it provide for clean air and matters of that kind? A. … We have a separate assembling unit, which is a little building itself, inside the big building with double and triple filtered air. Q. That is. where the clean air is necessary? A.

Response to application from respondent Myra Brown, et al. — Department of Education, et al., Petitioners v. Myra Brown, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Response to application from respondent Myra Brown, et al. · Dec 7, 2022

First, they argue that Plaintiffs could not have suffered a procedural deprivation based on the lack of a notice-and-comment period because the HEROES Act expressly exempts the APA’s notice-and-comment … (cleaned up). To do so, Defendants point to the HEROES Act. But the text of the Act points the other way for at least three reasons. See Aldridge v.

Emergency Application — Brian Firebaugh, et al., Petitioners v. Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General

Supreme Court brief · Emergency Application · Dec 16, 2024

(cleaned up). … (cleaned up).

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Froebel v. Meyer

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 2001

The Clean Water Act (“CWA”), the Resource Conser- vation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), and the Clean Air Act (“CAA”) all have substantially similar “citizen suit” provi- sions. 33 U.S.C. § 1365; 42 U.S.C … e 40a Control Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4911; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6972; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7604; and CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9659.

Opposition Brief — Taxpayers of King County v. King County

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1998

It also ignores the court’s conclusion in CLEAN uv. … It was not a violation of the due process rights of Petitioners for the trial court to act in accordance with this Rule.