green
Positive treatment
2.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Alaska Center for the Environment v. Reilly
See, Environmental Defense Fund v. Thomas, 870 F.2d 892, 899-900 (2nd Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 991 , 110 S.Ct. 537 , 107 L.Ed.2d 535 (1989) (holding that the court could compel the EPA to take final action with respect to national air quality standards, but it lacked jurisdiction to require the EPA to revise the standards to limit particular pollutants).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth of VA v. United States
See also Monongahela Power Co. v. Reilly, 980 F.2d 272, 275 (4th Cir.1992) (“Because [§ 307(b)(1) ] embodies a grant of exclusive jurisdiction, it appears that if the District of Columbia [Circuit] has jurisdiction over the present action, the district court does not.”) (quoting Environmental Defense Fund v. Thomas, 870 F.2d 892, 896-97 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 991 , 110 S.Ct. 537 , 107 L.Ed.2d 535 (1989)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth Of Virginia v. United States
See also Monongahela Power Co. v. Reilly, 980 F.2d 272, 275 (4th Cir.1992) ( "Because [Sec. 307(b)(1) ] embodies a grant of exclusive jurisdiction, it appears that if the District of Columbia [Circuit] has jurisdiction over the present action, the district court does not." ) (quoting Environmental Defense Fund v. Thomas, 870 F.2d 892, 896-97 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 991 , 110 S.Ct. 537 , 107 L.Ed.2d 535 (1989)). 27 Virginia makes several points in contending that Sec. 307(b)(1) does not, or at least should not be allowed to, restrict final action review to the circuit courts. 28 First…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mutual Consent Provisions in the Guam Commonwealth Legislation
See also Alabama v. EPA, 871 F.2d 1548 , 1554 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 991 (1989) (“The State of Alabama is not included among the entities protected by the due process clause of the fifth amendment”); State of Oklahoma v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm., 494 F.Supp. 636, 661 (W.D.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. State Of Colorado
See, e.g., Alabama v. EPA, 871 F.2d 1548 , 1557 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 991 , 110 S.Ct. 538 , 107 L.Ed.2d 535 (1989). 25 Be that as it may, an action by a state to enforce its hazardous waste laws at a site undergoing a CERCLA response action is not necessarily a challenge to the CERCLA action.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Colorado
See, e.g., Alabama v. EPA, 871 F.2d 1548 , 1557 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 991 , 110 S.Ct. 538 , 107 L.Ed.2d 535 (1989).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
California
v.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
v.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
No. 89-333.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 4, 1989.
493 U.S. 991
Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted.