Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Lake Champlain forms part of the border between New York and Vermont. D operates a pulp and paper mill on the New York side of the lake. It discharges pollution into the Lake. Ps are a group of property owners who reside on the Vermont shore. Ps filed a class action suit against D, claiming that the discharge of effluents constituted a 'continuing nuisance' under Vermont common law. Ps claimed the pollutants made the water 'foul, unhealthy, smelly, and . . . unfit for recreational use,' thereby diminishing the value of their property. Ps asked for $20 million in compensatory damages, $100 million in punitive damages, and injunctive relief. D moved for summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings, claiming that the Clean Water Act pre-empted Ps' state-law suit. The Vermont District Court denied the motion to dismiss. The court acknowledged that federal law normally governs interstate water pollution. It found, however, that two sections of the CWA explicitly preserve state-law rights of action. The Court held that a state action to redress interstate water pollution could be maintained under the law of the State in which the injury occurred. The District Court certified its decision for interlocutory appeal. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed for the reasons stated by the District Court. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co