Litigation

City of Los Angeles “NextGen” Flight Procedures: We represented the City of Los Angeles in litigation challenging Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) implementation of new flight procedures in Los Angeles. We prevailed in the Ninth Circuit, obtaining a judgment that the FAA had failed to perform an adequate environmental review of the new procedures and receiving attorneys’ fees from FAA through a settlement. When the FAA failed to revise the procedures in a timely manner, we obtained a Writ of Mandamus requiring them to take immediate action to comply with the Court’s earlier decision.

Addressing Emerging Contaminants and other Hazardous Wastes: We litigate claims and disputes arising under federal and state hazardous and solid waste laws, as well as cost recovery suits. For example, firm lawyers represented the California Attorney General’s Office in connection with four lawsuits under RCRA and CERCLA regarding hazardous waste disposal facilities, with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake. We also represented the County of San Bernardino and a number of other parties in major CERCLA cost recovery litigation concerning emerging and other contaminants, including a settlement that secured precedent-setting protections for clients over the objections of non-settling parties.

Uinta Basin Railway Litigation: Kaplan Kirsch lawyers represented Eagle County, Colorado, in vacating the Surface Transportation Board’s approval of an 88-mile rail line that would have added up to 18 miles of trains hauling waxy crude oil each day on an existing line through the Rocky Mountains within a few feet of the Colorado River. The D.C. Circuit held that the Board had failed to consider the downline environmental effects of transporting billions of gallons of oil through Colorado, including rail accidents along the Colorado River and the risk of wildfires, and failed to adequately “weigh the project’s uncertain financial viability” in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act and Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act.

Redding Rancheria Casino Relocation Project: We represented the Redding Rancheria (“Tribe”) in defeating the City of Redding’s efforts to prevent the Tribe from relocating its gaming facility by summarily eliminating public roadway access. We brought suit on the Tribe’s behalf, alleging violations of the California Environmental Quality Act, California Streets and Highways Code, and California Surplus Lands Act. The Court found that the City violated all three statutes, ordered the road to be restored, and enjoined the City from taking further action related to the road without following proper legal processes, including full notice to and opportunity for input by the Tribe. This victory allowed the Tribe to continue its 20-year effort to restore a sufficient tribal land base to support the Tribe’s long-term economic development goals and provide governmental services to its growing citizen population.

SEPTA Northeast Corridor Access Litigation: The firm represented SEPTA in litigation against Amtrak seeking confirmation of SEPTA’s right to access and use the Philadelphia section of the Northeast Corridor and adjacent stations pursuant to property and statutory rights created when Congress allocated rights in the Northeast Corridor among commuter, passenger and freight operators. In the District Court, we obtained summary judgment on the statutory right of access, but the court denied that SEPTA had an easement right of access. On appeal of the easement right, the Court of Appeals reversed the District Court and confirmed that SEPTA has an easement right of access.

Land Use Dispute: We represented the Forney Museum of Transportation at the Colorado Court of Appeals regarding the scope of an access easement and implied rights relating to the Museum’s use of an adjacent property in Denver, Colorado. The Court of Appeals sided with the museum and reversed in part the trial court’s decision relating to the museum’s rights under the easement.

Albuquerque Bus Rapid Transit National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Litigation: Our team represented City of Albuquerque in defending decisions by the City and Federal Transit Administration approving a bus rapid transit project on Route 66 in downtown Albuquerque against NEPA and National Historic Preservation Act claims, including defeating requests for emergency injunctions at both the district court and Tenth Circuit.

National Historic Preservation Act Litigation: The firm successfully challenged Army Corps of Engineers projects on Virginia’s James River for failure to comply with NEPA and Section 110(f) of the National Historic Preservation Act. The case involved matters of first impression before the D.C. Circuit under both statutes. It was the first (and still only) successful claim under Section 110(f) in the 40-year history of the statute.

Denver Central I-70 NEPA Litigation: Our team defeated a motion for preliminary injunction alleging NEPA and Clean Air Act violations in federal approval of a $1.2 billion highway improvement project on I-70 in Denver. Our team obtained dismissal of NEPA claims, alleging failure to analyze the environmental impact of flood-mitigation project conducted by the City of Denver.