|
Interfaith Community Organization v. Honeywell International, Inc.,
263 F.Supp.2d 796 (D.N.J. 2003), affirmed, 399 F.3d 248 (3d Cir. 2005), certiorari denied 125 S.Ct. 2951
(2005): The firm represents the Interfaith Community
Organization, the Hackensack Riverkeeper, and several individual plaintiffs in a citizen suit brought
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) that is resulting in the excavation and
removal of 1.5 million tons of toxic hexavalent chromium residue from a 34-acre site in Jersey City,
NJ and a clean-up of the deep ground water and sediments in the Hackensack River. The District
Court for the District of New Jersey ordered the excavation after finding, among other things, that
(1) the plaintiffs, some of whom live within a mile of the site, had standing to bring suit; (2) the site
represents an "imminent and substantial endangerment to human health and the environment" under
RCRA; and (3) the necessary permanent remedy for those endangerments is total excavation of the
waste.
The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s injunction, noting that the
citizen-plaintiffs had met a higher than necessary standard in proving Honeywell’s liability and that
"the time for a clean-up has come." The firm continues to represent the plaintiffs in proceedings
before Special Master Robert G. Torricelli, appointed to oversee the implementation of the
injunction. The clean-up is scheduled to be completed in 2009.
Salazar v. The District of Columbia, 954 F. Supp. 278 (D.D.C. 1996): The firm represents a
class of Medicaid recipients and applicants in a broad-based challenge to the District of
Columbia's operation of the Medicaid program. The case alleged that the District of Columbia
failed to deem newborns to mothers on Medicaid immediately eligible, failed to provide the
opportunity to apply for Medicaid at clinics and hospitals, failed to decide Medicaid
applications in 45 days, terminated people from Medicaid without adequate notice, and failed
to notify families about and provide comprehensive child health services under the EPSDT
(early and periodic, screening, diagnosis and treatment) program. After a trial at which the
plaintiff class prevailed, the case settled while an appeal was pending and the firm continues
to monitor the District's compliance with a comprehensive injunctive order.
Palmer v. Powell (Secretary of State): Since the early 1970's, the firm has assisted
women in their efforts to challenge and change the employment practices in the Foreign Service.
As a result of this class action, women who were excluded from the Foreign Service as a result
of the discriminatory impact of the Foreign Service written examination have been provided with
the opportunity to re-apply. Many have become Foreign Service Officers. In addition, female
Foreign Service Officers who were denied promotions or were channeled into certain career paths
or denied certain assignments or awards due to discriminatory practices have been compensated
through priority assignments, backpay awards, and promotions. The firm continues to oversee
enforcement of consent decrees with the State Department that are designed to correct
discriminatory entry practices.
NJPIRG v. Powell Duffryn Terminals, Inc., 720 F. Supp. 1158 (D.N.J. 1989), affirmed in
part and reversed in part, 913 F.2d 64 (3d Cir. 1990): The firm litigated two cases involving
the Powell Duffryn terminal in Bayonne, New Jersey. The first case resulted in the imposition
of the statutory maximum penalty for Powell Duffryn's violation of the discharge limitations in
its NPDES permit. At the time, the $4.085 million was the largest penalty ever imposed by a
court in a suit brought by citizens to enforce the Clean Water Act. The parties later settled
the second lawsuit which involved Powell Duffryn's monitoring and reporting violations. The
settlement resulted in the creation of the New Jersey Environmental Endowment. Since its
creation, the monies from the settlement of several Clean Water Act citizen enforcement suits
have been directed to the Endowment. Each year on Earth Day, the Endowment makes grants to
projects related to improving and understanding the environment.
Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc. (TOC), 528 U.S. 167(2000):
The op-ed piece in the Washington Post declared this case "A Win for the Environment."
The Supreme Court's 7 to 2 decision reversed the series of Supreme Court decisions, often
authored by Justice Scalia in which citizens were denied access to the federal courts due
to their lack of standing under the Constitution. Under Laidlaw, citizens who have been affected by
polluters can go to federal court to seek relief and enforce environmental laws.
The district court decision in the Laidlaw case is also significant. 890 F. Supp. 470 (D.S.C. 1995).
The district court held that government enforcement of environmental laws was
not diligent prosecution unless the penalty assessed removed the economic benefit of
noncompliance. The district court reasoned that a prosecution could not have been diligent
if it left the violator in a better position than a company that had complied with the law
from the start.
|
