Six Thematic Collections of Judicial Decisions
A curated collection of actual judicial decisions accompanied by original, structured legal analysis. Cases are organised into six thematic collections spanning nuisance and interstate pollution, water rights, land use and takings, biodiversity, pollution regulation, and international trade and climate law.
Or browse legal theory articlesNuisance and Interstate Pollution
The common law of nuisance — both private and public — has been one of the primary legal mechanisms for addressing environmental harm since the nineteenth century. These cases trace the doctrine from private property disputes over industrial smoke to the Supreme Court's recognition of state quasi-sovereign interests in clean air and water, and its modern extension to invasive species and hydraulic fracturing.
Attorney-General v PYA Quarries Ltd
Court of Appeal · England and Wales · 1957
[1957] 2 QB 169
The Court of Appeal clarified the distinction between public and private nuisance, holding that a public nuisance is an interference affecting a class of Her Majesty's subjects generally, and that it may give rise to both criminal prosecution and civil claims by individuals who suffer special damage.
Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc
House of Lords · England and Wales · 1994
[1994] 2 AC 264
The House of Lords held that foreseeability of harm is a necessary element of liability in both nuisance and negligence, and that the tannery was not liable for aquifer contamination because the risk of the chemical seeping into the water supply was not reasonably foreseeable at the time of the spillage.
Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Company
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1907
206 U.S. 230
The U.S. Supreme Court granted an injunction sought by the State of Georgia against Tennessee copper companies whose sulphur dioxide emissions crossed state lines and destroyed Georgia's forests and crops, recognising the state's quasi-sovereign interest in its air and territory.
Madison v. Ducktown Sulphur, Copper & Iron Co.
Supreme Court of Tennessee · Tennessee, United States · 1904
113 Tenn. 331, 83 S.W. 658
Madison v. Ducktown Sulphur is a landmark nuisance case where small farmers sued two large copper mining companies for damages caused by toxic smoke and gases from their smelting operations. The emissions destroyed nearby timber, crops, and made life unbearable for residents. The court faced the challenge of balancing the competing interests of agricultural landowners against the economic importance of the local mining industry. While the court acknowledged the nuisance, it refused to grant an injunction that would shut down the companies due to their economic impact.
Michigan v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · United States (federal) · 2011
No. 10 C. 4457 (7th Cir.)
The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction sought by Great Lakes states to force the Army Corps to close waterway locks, finding that federal common law of public nuisance extends to invasive species but that ongoing regulatory efforts diminished the need for judicial intervention.
Missouri v. Illinois and the Sanitary District of Chicago
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1906
200 U.S. 496
The Supreme Court dismissed Missouri's suit seeking to enjoin Chicago from discharging sewage into the Mississippi watershed, finding the scientific evidence of causation insufficient to establish a public nuisance.
Roth v. Cabot Oil & Gas Corp.
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania · Pennsylvania, United States · 2013
USDC M.D. Pa. (2013)
A federal district court denied a motion to dismiss homeowners' claims that natural gas drilling operations contaminated their groundwater, finding the complaint adequately pleaded claims under the Pennsylvania Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act and for private nuisance.
Sturges v Bridgman
Court of Appeal (Chancery Division) · England and Wales · 1879
(1879) 11 Ch D 852
The Court of Appeal held that whether an activity constitutes a nuisance depends on the character of the locality, establishing that a long-standing industrial activity can become a nuisance when the character of the neighbourhood changes.
Water Rights and the Public Trust
Water law in the western United States developed around the doctrine of prior appropriation — 'first in time, first in right' — which prioritised consumptive use over instream flows. These cases trace the tension between prior appropriation and the public trust doctrine, and examine the constitutional right of access to water in South Africa.
Irwin v. Phillips
Supreme Court of California · California, United States · 1855
5 Cal. 140
The California Supreme Court upheld the doctrine of prior appropriation for water rights, holding that the first user of water from a stream has priority over later users, superseding common law riparian rights on public lands during the Gold Rush.
Mazibuko v. City of Johannesburg
Constitutional Court of South Africa · South Africa · 2009
Constitutional Court of South Africa (2009)
The South African Constitutional Court upheld Johannesburg's free basic water policy and pre-paid water meter installation, holding that the city's approach was reasonable under the constitutional right of access to sufficient water and that courts should defer to democratic institutions on resource allocation.
National Audubon Society v. Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles
Supreme Court of California · California, United States · 1983
33 Cal. 3d 419
The California Supreme Court held that the public trust doctrine protects navigable waters from harm caused by diversion of non-navigable tributaries, requiring the state to consider public trust values before approving water diversions and retaining continuing authority to reconsider past allocations.
Land Use and Regulatory Takings
When does a government regulation that restricts property use go 'too far' and require compensation? These cases trace the development of regulatory takings doctrine from the foundational zoning case of Euclid through the ad hoc balancing of Penn Central, the categorical rule of Lucas, and the application of 'background principles' in Palazzolo and Good.
Good v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · United States (federal) · 1997
Ct. Fed. Claims (1997)
The Court of Federal Claims found no taking where the Army Corps denied a permit to dredge and fill wetlands on Sugarloaf Key, Florida, holding that the property retained economic value through transferable development rights and that the owner's investment-backed expectations were not reasonable given the regulatory climate.
Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1992
505 U.S. 1003
The Supreme Court held that when a regulation deprives land of all economically beneficial use, it constitutes a per se taking unless the proscribed use was not part of the owner's title to begin with under background principles of nuisance and property law.
Palazzolo v. State of Rhode Island
Superior Court of Rhode Island · Rhode Island, United States · 2005
Super. Ct. R.I. (2005)
A Rhode Island court found no regulatory taking where a landowner was prohibited from developing a salt marsh, holding that the proposed development would constitute a public nuisance under background principles of state law and that the public trust doctrine limited the property rights acquired.
Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1978
438 U.S. 104
The Supreme Court established the foundational framework for regulatory takings analysis, holding that applying New York's Landmarks Preservation Law to Grand Central Terminal did not constitute a taking because it permitted reasonable beneficial use and did not interfere with investment-backed expectations.
Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Company
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1926
272 U.S. 365
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of comprehensive zoning ordinances, establishing that zoning is a valid exercise of the police power and that the law of nuisances provides helpful analogies for determining the scope of regulatory authority.
Biodiversity and Environmental Assessment
The National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act provide two of the strongest legal frameworks for protecting ecosystems. These cases examine the requirements for environmental impact assessment of connected and cumulative actions, the scope of endangered species protection including habitat modification, and the mandatory nature of ESA obligations.
Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1995
515 U.S. 687
The Supreme Court upheld the Interior Department's regulation defining 'harm' under the Endangered Species Act to include significant habitat modification that actually kills or injures protected wildlife, affirming that habitat degradation can constitute a prohibited 'taking.'
Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1978
437 U.S. 153
The Supreme Court held that the Endangered Species Act requires injunction of the operation of a virtually completed federal dam that would destroy the habitat of an endangered fish, the snail darter, rejecting a balancing of equities approach.
Thomas v. Peterson
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · United States (federal) · 1985
9th Cir. (1985)
The Ninth Circuit held that the Forest Service violated NEPA by failing to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement analysing the combined environmental impacts of a timber road and the timber sales it was designed to facilitate, which were 'connected' and 'cumulative' actions under CEQ regulations.
Pollution Regulation and Hazardous Substances
Modern environmental law is built on statutory frameworks — the Clean Water Act, CERCLA, FIFRA, and the Clean Air Act — that empower agencies to regulate pollution through technology-based standards, impose liability for hazardous waste, and set air quality standards. These cases examine the scope of agency discretion, the breadth of hazardous waste liability, and the preemption of state law.
Dow Chemical Co. v. Blum
District Court, Michigan · Michigan, United States · 1979
D. Mich. (1979)
A federal district court upheld the EPA's emergency suspension of two herbicides (2,4,5-T and Silvex) under FIFRA, deferring to the agency's judgment despite acknowledging the scientific evidence was 'suggestive' rather than conclusive.
International Paper Co. v. Ouellette
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1987
479 U.S. 481
The Supreme Court held that the Clean Water Act does not preempt state common law nuisance suits, but that the law of the source state governs, balancing federal uniformity with preserved state-law rights of action.
New York v. Shore Realty Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · United States (federal) · 1985
759 F.2d 1212 (2d Cir. 1985)
The Second Circuit held that a current property owner was liable under CERCLA for cleanup costs of hazardous waste on its property, even though the owner did not generate or transport the waste, establishing broad owner liability under the Superfund law.
Pronsolino v. Nastri (EPA TMDLs)
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · United States (federal) · 2002
9th Cir. (2002)
The Ninth Circuit held that the Clean Water Act's TMDL requirements apply to waters impaired by nonpoint source pollution, not just point sources, requiring EPA to establish pollution limits for a river polluted solely by sediment from forestry and roads.
State of Mississippi v. Environmental Protection Agency
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · United States (federal) · 2013
D.C. Cir. (2013)
The D.C. Circuit upheld EPA's revision of the primary ozone NAAQS but remanded the secondary standard, holding that EPA failed to determine what level of protection was requisite to protect public welfare.
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Costle
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · United States (federal) · 1978
D.C. Cir. (1978)
The D.C. Circuit upheld EPA's technology-based effluent limitations for the pulp and paper industry, endorsing the Clean Water Act's shift from water-quality-based to technology-based regulation and deferring to EPA's balancing of costs and benefits.
International Environmental Trade and Climate Law
Environmental protection intersects with international trade law through the WTO's GATT exceptions and with climate law through the application of existing statutes to greenhouse gases. These cases examine the balance between free trade and environmental regulation, state standing to challenge agency inaction on climate, and the legal framework for regulating greenhouse gas emissions.
City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 1978
437 U.S. 617
The Supreme Court struck down New Jersey's ban on importing solid waste from other states as violating the Commerce Clause, holding that states may not discriminate against articles of commerce based on their out-of-state origin, even for environmental purposes.
Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. Environmental Protection Agency
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · United States (federal) · 2012
D.C. Cir. (2012)
The D.C. Circuit upheld EPA's Endangerment Finding and Tailpipe Rule for greenhouse gases, finding EPA's interpretation of the Clean Air Act unambiguously correct and supported by substantial scientific evidence, confirming the regulatory framework established by Massachusetts v. EPA.
European Communities v. Brazil (Retreaded Tyres)
World Trade Organization Appellate Body · International (WTO) · 2007
WTO Appellate Body (2007)
The WTO Appellate Body upheld Brazil's import ban on retreaded tyres as justified under GATT Article XX(b) for the protection of human, animal, and plant life and health, finding the ban contributed to reducing waste tyre accumulation and associated health risks.
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency
Supreme Court of the United States · United States (federal) · 2007
549 U.S. 497
The Supreme Court held that greenhouse gases are 'air pollutants' under the Clean Air Act and that EPA has a statutory duty to regulate them if they endanger public health or welfare, also recognising state standing to challenge EPA's inaction based on quasi-sovereign interests.
United States/Canada v. European Communities (Beef Hormones)
World Trade Organization Appellate Body · International (WTO) · 2008
WTO Appellate Body (2008)
The WTO Appellate Body reversed a panel finding that the EU's import ban on beef from hormone-treated cattle was not based on a risk assessment, finding the panel applied an incorrect standard of review, but was unable to complete the analysis on the consistency of the ban with the SPS Agreement.