Remove 2015 Remove Clean Air Act Remove Climate Scientist Remove Sea Level
article thumbnail

October 2019 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Law Columbia

In addition, the court rejected the contention that the Clean Air Act or foreign affairs doctrine completely preempted the plaintiffs’ claims and also indicated that federal common law would not provide a basis for complete preemption. Court Dismissed Counterclaims in Climate Scientist’s Defamation Lawsuit.

2019 40
article thumbnail

March 2018 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Law Columbia

The court stated that the issue arose “because a necessary and critical element of the hydrological damage caused by defendants’ alleged conduct is the rising sea level along the Pacific coast and in the San Francisco Bay, both of which are navigable waters of the United States.” 34-2015-80002005 (Cal. ExxonMobil Corp.

2018 40
article thumbnail

May 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Columbia Climate Law

EPA of a 2015 rule barring replacement of ozone-depleting substances with hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which are powerful greenhouse gases. Circuit vacated the 2015 rule to the extent that it prohibited continued use of HFCs by companies that previously switched to HFCs from an ozone-depleting substance. In Mexichem , the D.C.

2020 40