Search for: "Waters v. United States"
Results 321 - 340
of 5,325
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Sep 2022, 5:35 am
Eric joined Visiting Assistant Professor Kelly Nuckolls to discuss with the class possible upcoming changes to the CWA's "Waters of the United States" definition by both the Supreme Court (Sackett v. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 9:03 am
Gorsuch observed that “water runs downhill, and gravity tends to work its wonders with water,” so that it is foreseeable that pollution from a septic tank will “wind up in the waters of the United States. [read post]
6 Jan 2009, 9:35 pm
United States Forest Service, No. 08A368. [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 9:57 am
Paragraph 7 is amended as follows: The phrase “United States ground-based ballistic missile defense interceptors” is replaced by the phrase “a United States Ballistic Missile Defense System”. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 7:43 am
The justices’ eventual opinion in Mississippi v. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 7:37 am
United States decision regarding the extent of Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction. [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 6:53 pm
United States, and the retired justice remains stone-faced with each one. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 3:22 pm
The CWA further defines "navigable waters" as "the waters of the United States. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 8:55 am
<> ONRC Action v. [read post]
29 Jul 2021, 5:32 am
Nathan Frischkorn has posted “Treaty Rights and Water Habitat: Applying the United States v. [read post]
23 Apr 2020, 4:09 pm
United States, narrowly construing the “waters of the United States” protected by the Clean Water Act.) [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 5:18 pm
The Court also noted that many other courts in the western United States have also concluded that partial forfeiture is inherent in the concept of beneficial use.The Utah Supreme Court next tackled the issue of forfeiture versus abandonment of a water right. [read post]
15 Nov 2019, 7:00 am
Here is the opinion. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 8:33 am
The case is U.S. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2022, 12:04 pm
United States, however, recognized an exception for cases in which a nonmember enters a contract or other consensual commercial relationship with a tribe or its members. [read post]
29 Nov 2014, 12:00 am
United States v. [read post]
16 Sep 2011, 5:26 pm
As predicted, the United States just petitioned for Supreme Court review (petition here). [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 3:22 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 3:46 pm
United States, No. 2007-5153 (Sep. 25, 2008), a decision we noted here. [read post]
