Environmental Law Portal

Welcome to the Beveridge & Diamond Environmental Law Portal.

Beveridge & Diamond’s 100 lawyers in seven U.S. offices focus on environmental and natural resource law, litigation and dispute resolution. We help clients around the world resolve critical environmental and sustainability issues relating to their products, facilities, and operations. 

Subscribe for updates via:

Meet the Contributors


Recent Posts

Click here to learn more about us

Major Changes to Endangered Species Act Regulations Proposed

On July 25, 2018, the Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”) and the Department of Commerce’s National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) (collectively “the Services”) issued three proposed rules that would modify key aspects of their Endangered Species Act (”ESA”) regulations. The proposals respond in part to stakeholder comments submitted to FWS last year as a result of Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda.” Read More ›

UN to Kick Off Negotiations to Regulate Access to and Require Benefit-Sharing from Marine Genetic Resources in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

This September in New York, UN member states will begin to negotiate a new, binding international instrument to govern the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction.  Illegal, unregulated, and unreported fishing and bottom trawling seriously threaten valuable marine biodiversity, particularly around hotspots such as seamounts, deep-water corals, and hydrothermal vents.[1]  The upcoming negotiations of the Intergovernmental Conference will consider how best to regulate and promote the sustainable use of marine biodiversity, potentially including a requirement that some of the benefits of research and development from these resources be shared with developing countries.[2]  

Read More ›

New York Brings PFOA/S Products Liability Suit, Claiming Natural Resource and Punitive Damages

Content written by Summer Associate Leigh S. Barton and edited by Eric Klein and Graham Zorn.

In a recently filed action, the State of New York is suing six manufacturers and marketers of of perfluorooctanoic acid (“PFOA”) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (“PFOS”) containing firefighting foams under theories of strict product liability, public nuisance, and restitution. Complaint, New York v. 3M Co., No. 904029-18 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. June 19, 2018). This is the first example of sovereign-led PFOA/PFOS litigation. Read More ›

New York Court Grants Class Cert. to PFOA Exposure Plaintiffs

Content written by Summer Associate Leigh S. Barton and edited by Eric Klein and Graham Zorn.

In the latest in a flurry of PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) suits, a New York court granted class certification to a group of New York residents who claim that they have been harmed by decades of exposure to the chemical near a manufacturing facility.  See Burdick v. Tonoga, Inc., Index No. 253835 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2018).  The court found that although each resident might have been exposed to different levels of the contaminant and may have been exposed in different ways, plaintiffs had demonstrated that there were common issues of fact and law among them that warranted class certification. Read More ›

Certification Denied in Glass Manufacturing Pollution Class Action

In a potential sign of increased scrutiny of environmental class actions under recent Supreme Court decisions, a class of property owners and residents near Danville, Kentucky, were denied class certification in a class action suit alleging that a glass manufacturing plant intentionally or negligently released toxic chemicals.  See Modern Holdings, LLC v. Corning, Inc., Civ. No. 13-0405, Memorandum Opinion and Order (E.D. Ky. Mar. 29, 2018).  The plaintiffs claimed personal injuries and property damage from the plant’s alleged illegal dumping of hazardous chemicals in nearby fields, streams, and properties. Read More ›

Florida Federal Court Denies Proposed 60-Square-Mile Class Area in Environmental Contamination Action

A Florida federal district court recently denied a petition for class certification by a group of property owners that allegedly suffered health risks and diminished property values due to contamination at Pratt & Whitney’s neighboring aerospace testing and manufacturing plant.  Cotromano v. United Techs. Corp., Civ. No. 13-80928, Opinion Memorandum and Order (S.D. Fla. May 2, 2018).  The district court decision illustrates some of the issues of proof that a putative class encompassing a large geographic area may encounter. Read More ›

Groundwater Contamination Claim Survives Motion to Dismiss

A recent decision of the Eastern District of New York in a groundwater contamination action illustrates the fact-sensitive nature of statute of limitations defenses.  In Hicksville Water Dist. v. Philips Elecs. N. Am. Corp., 2018 WL 1542670 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2018), the court denied a motion to dismiss state tort law claims as time-barred because it could not conclude from the complaint and judicially noticed documents that the plaintiffs knew, outside the limitations window, that the alleged groundwater contamination was “significant enough to justify an immediate or specific remediation effort.” Read More ›

Texas Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Discovery Rule in Personal Injury Suits

Applying the statute of limitations for legal, rather than discoverable, personal injury, the Texas Supreme Court dismissed a personal injury suit against Schlumberger Technology Corporation that arose from the mishandling of fracking liquids.  Schlumberger Tech. Corp. v. Pasko, 544 S.W.3d 830 (Tex. 2018). Read More ›

New Mexico Federal Court Allows Tort Claims Against EPA Contractor in Gold King Mine Release

Highlighting limits on pre-trial motions arguing CERCLA preemption of state common law claims, a New Mexico federal court denied a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ tort claims arising from a 2015 release of impounded water from the Gold King Mine.  See New Mexico v. EPA, Civ. No. 16-0465 MCA/LF, Memorandum Opinion and Order (D.N.M. Feb. 12, 2018).  The court determined that both the State of New Mexico and the Navajo Nation had valid claims for damages under New Mexico tort law in addition to their CERCLA claims for cost recovery and injunctive relief.  Read More ›

When CERCLA Preemption Fails, Defendants Fall Back on State Law Protections

Interpreting the limits CERCLA imposes on state law environmental claims, the Southern District of California held that while plaintiffs’ environmental cleanup claims were not barred, plaintiffs could not claim damages for future remediation costs.  See Greenfield MHP Assocs., L.P. v. Ametek, Inc., Civ. No. 15-1525, Order Granting in Part and Denying in part Motion for Summary Judgment (S.D. Cal. Apr. 12, 2018). Read More ›