Cases

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge: The Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (“District”) brought' an action against the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) for declaratory and in-junctive relief after the EPA disallowed a grant of funds to the District for the purchase of replacement wetlands. The purchase was required by federal and state agencies (including the EPA) with jurisdiction over the construction of the Distr

668 F.Supp. 1427 (1987) SACRAMENTO REGIONAL COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, Plaintiff, v. Lee M. THOMAS, et al., Defendants. And related counterclaim. No. Civ. S-85-1802 LKK. United States District Court, E.D. California. September 17, 1987. As Amended October 16, 1987. *1428 L.B. Elam, County Counsel, Robert L.

138 Nev., Advance Opinion 43 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA DIAMOND NATURAL RESOURCES No. 81224 PROTECTION & CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION; J&T FARMS, LLC; GALLAGHER FARMS LLC; JEFF LOMMORI; M&C HAY; CONLEY LAND & LIVESTOCK, LLC; JAMES FILED ETCHEVERRY; NICK ETCHEVERRY;

113 Cal.Rptr.2d 90 (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 107 Teri LEWIS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO et al., Defendants and Respondents. No. C032865. Court of Appeal, Third District. October 25, 2001. Review Denied January 23, 2002. *93 Baum, Hedlund, Aristei, Guilford &

ALARCON, Circuit Judge: The People of the State of California by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (the “Sacramento Air Quality District”) appeal from the final order of the district court granting the motion of the Department of the Air Force, Sacramento Air Logistics Center, McClellan Air Force Base (the “United States”) for summary judgment, and denying their cross motion for summary judgment. Th

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DIAMOND A RANCH, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 20-cv-3478 (CRC) KRISTI NOEM 1, in her official capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Good fences surely make good neighbors.

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 04-786 L Filed: November 3, 2017 **************************************** Declaration of Water Right Ownership, * N.M. STAT. ANN. § 72-1-3 (West 2015); * Endangered Species Act of 1973, 7 U.S.C. SACRAMENTO GRAZING ASS’N, INC., *

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING PENDING MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. BRADEN, Judge. The New Mexico Constitution provides that “[bjenefieial use shall be the basis, the measure^] and the limit of the right to the use of water.” New Mexioo Constitution, art. XVI, § 3. The Takings Clause of the United States Constitution guarantees that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use without ju

BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judge: This appeal arises from contamination of groundwater in Orange County, California, from various oil companies’ use of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (“MTBE”). This case, initially brought in 2003 in California state court, was removed to the Central District of California and transferred in 2004 to the Southern District of New York by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict

ORDER GRANTING INTERVENORS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on remand from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, with a mandate to consider the grounds for dismissal of Plaintiffs Potrero Hills Landfill, et al.’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (Doc. # 17), other than Younger abstention, presented by Intervenors Sustainability, Parks,

657 F.3d 876 (2011) POTRERO HILLS LANDFILL, INC.; BLT Enterprises of Sacramento, Inc.; Brentwood Disposal Service, Inc.; Concord Disposal Service, Inc.; Contra Costa Waste Service, Inc.; Discovery Bay Disposal, Inc.; Oakley Disposal Service, Inc.; Pittsburg Disposal and Debris Box Service, Inc.; Rio Vista Sanitation Service, Inc.; Waste Connections, Inc.; Waste Connections of California, Inc., DBA El Dorado Disposal Service; Trashpros, LLC; West Coast Re

584 F.3d 43 (2009) ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, Petitioner, v. UNOCAL CORPORATION, formerly known as Costal Oil New York, Inc., formerly known as Union Oil Company Of California, Conocophillips Company, Chevron U.S.A., Inc., individually doing business as Chevron Products Company, doing business as Chevron Chemical Company, Chevrontexaco Corporation, Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., now known as TMR Company, Equilon Enterprises LLC, Shell Oi

509 F.Supp.2d 865 (2007) CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF KERN, et al., Defendants. No. CV# 06-5094 GAF (VBKx). United States District Court, C.D. California. August 10, 2007. *866 *867 *868 Rockard J. Delgadillo, City Attorney, Christo

462 F.Supp.2d 1105 (2006) CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF KERN, et al., Defendants. No. CV 06-5094GAF(VBLX). United States District Court, C.D. California. November 20, 2006. *1106 *1107 Los Angeles City Attorney's Office, Rockard J. Delgadillo, City Attorney,

184 F.Supp.2d 1016 (2000) ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL OF SACRAMENTO, Plaintiff, v. Rodney SLATER, et al., Defendants. No. Civ.S-00-409 LKK/DAD. United States District Court, E.D. California. November 6, 2000. *1017 Deborah S. Reames, San Francisco, CA, Joseph J. Brecher, Brecher and Volker, Oakland, CA, for Plaintiff. Norman L.

222 Cal.App.3d 687 (1990) 271 Cal. Rptr. 802 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO et al., Petitioners, v. FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION et al., Respondents. Docket No. C005845. Court of Appeals of California, Third District. July 27, 1990. *688 COUNSEL L.B. Elam, County Counsel, and John F. Whisenhunt, Deputy

905 F.2d 1262 31 ERC 1473, 58 USLW 2742, 20 Envtl.L. Rep. 21,113 SACRAMENTO REGIONAL COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.William K. REILLY, in his official capacity as Administratorof the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency; United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency,Defendants-Appellants. No. 89-15621. United States

134 Cal.Rptr.2d 510 (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 166 BLACK DIMOND ASPHALT, INC., Petitioner, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of San Joaquin County, Respondent; California Insurance Guarantee Association, Real Party in Interest. No. C042660. Court of Appeal, Third District. May 27, 2003. *511 Law Offices of Brunn & Fly

24 Cal.App.4th 393 (1994) 29 Cal. Rptr.2d 232 ERMA DAVIS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF SACRAMENTO et al., Defendants and Respondents. Docket No. C013547. Court of Appeals of California, Third District. March 31, 1994. *397 COUNSEL Thomas S. Crary for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

ORDER The opinion filed May 19, 2014, and published at 751 F.3d 1113, is amended as follows: At slip opinion page 32, in the fourth and fifth textual sentences in the second full paragraph, Change: “Imperial Irrigation, Imperial County, and the State of California, not the Secretary, will ultimately determine how to allocate the water they receive. If they so choose, they could allocate every acre