Search for: "v. Western Watersheds Project"
Results 61 - 72
of 72
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Mar 2010, 10:47 pm
– Charlotte Observer, March 8, 2010 Norfolk Southern Railway Co. has agreed to pay a $4 million penalty for a 2005 chlorine and diesel fuel spill that killed nine people and polluted a creek in western South Carolina, the federal government said Monday. [read post]
31 Jan 2010, 7:16 pm
As part of the settlement, Westar will also spend $6 million on environmental mitigation projects. [read post]
December 14, 2009 – Environmental Law Settlements, Decisions, Regulatory Actions and Lawsuit Filings
13 Dec 2009, 8:58 pm
Adapting to rising seas and higher temperatures is expected to be a big topic at the U.N. climate-change talks in Copenhagen this week, along with the projected cost – hundreds of billions of dollars, much of it going to countries that cannot afford it. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 9:11 pm
Click Here Center for Biological Diversity v. [read post]
31 Oct 2009, 4:06 pm
Paul, United States Magistrate Judge Jeanne Graham fined the company $100,000 and ordered it to make a $50,000 community service payment to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to benefit the Rice Creek Watershed. [read post]
7 Sep 2009, 2:12 pm
In a Texas oil spill case, US v. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 6:16 pm
., v. [read post]
11 Mar 2009, 6:53 pm
Western Watersheds Project v. [read post]
9 Nov 2008, 5:33 pm
Western Watersheds Project v. [read post]
24 Oct 2008, 1:39 am
Stretched to its limits, the opinion can be read to mean that simply requiring people to leave water in a watershed -- a perfectly reasonable request when excessive water use destroys that very watershed (and its species) -- constitutes a taking. [read post]
26 Apr 2008, 10:56 pm
Western Watersheds Project v. [read post]
19 Jan 2008, 2:22 am
Western Watersheds Project v. [read post]
