ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
MAY 8, 2024
And that has implications for tort law, contract law, and property law, because it is less clear in many ways how basic legal principles such as negligence, foreseeability, force majeure, and reasonableness will apply to particular problems. In late 2023, LSEW committed “to being net zero by 2030” in its operations.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
JUNE 8, 2021
Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that its review of the remand order in Baltimore’s climate change case against fossil fuel companies was limited to determining whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute. May 10, 2021).
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
JULY 2, 2021
The Court held that the provision used “extension” in its “temporal sense,” but that the statute did not impose a “continuity requirement” and instead allowed small refineries to apply for hardship extensions “at any time.” In re Enbridge Energy, LP , Nos.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
APRIL 9, 2021
In Minnesota, the district court granted the State of Minnesota’s motion to remand its case, which asserts state law claims under common law and consumer protection statutes. s consumer protection statute. On March 26, 2021, the court denied Exxon’s emergency motion for a temporary stay of the remand order.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
The court also dismissed defamation and related state tort claims. The court also granted motions to strike the state law claims pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute. The court granted the company leave to amend its complaint with 21 days.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
FEBRUARY 10, 2020
The defendants filed their reply brief on January 22, 2020, reiterating their arguments that the Tenth Circuit should review the entire remand order, not just the district court’s determination that removal was not proper under the federal-officer removal statute, and that there were multiple valid grounds for removal. City of Oakland v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
110 
Let's personalize your content