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

Topics

Recent Posts

Click here to learn more about us

Showing 4 posts by Brooklyn N. Hildebrandt.

DOT and EPA Release Proposal to Roll Back Obama-era Emissions Standards for Automobiles

On August 2, 2018, the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) and the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) issued two related, proposed rulemakings, which together comprise the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (“SAFE”) Vehicles Rule.  The proposed rule, if adopted, would curb NHTSA’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy (“CAFE”) standards and EPA’s tailpipe carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks for model years (“MY”) 2021 through 2026 that were issued in 2012.  The proposal also asserts that the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (“EPCA”), which requires NHTSA to set national fuel economy standards for new motor vehicles, preempts any state, including California, from imposing or enforcing its own vehicle fuel economy standard.  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 ›

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 ›

No Actual ‘Case or Controversy’ in Chromium Drinking Water Contamination Case

Shutting down a creative attempt to recoup costs from the federal government for groundwater contamination, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims dismissed a one-billion-dollar inverse condemnation claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Sacramento Suburban Water Dist. v. U.S., No. 17-860 C (Fed. Cl. Jan. 31, 2018).  Senior Judge Hodges found that the California hexavalent chromium groundwater limits the Plaintiff referred to in its complaint were not yet in effect, and therefore the case failed to meet the “case or controversy” requirement of the U.S. Constitution.  Id. at 1.  Read More ›