ENST 350 NOTES

ENST 350 NOTES - ENST 350 January 15, 2008 USC- United...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
ENST 350 January 15, 2008 USC- United States code- statutes passed by the US Govt CFR- Code of Federal Regulations- issued by federal agencies Defendant: Atlantic Cement Company Location: Hudson River Valley outside Albany Nuisance: substantial interference, unreasonable, out of the ordinary interference with one’s use and enjoyment of property Why protect someone’s use and enjoyment of property o Fundamental right in the 5 th amend. to property o Protect for financial reasons—you pay for it and have expectations for it o Right to do whatever you want with your property without explaining why - Ex. Sell or not sell Liberty- ability we have to write our own life story -marriage, children, profession, etc. Remedy- 2 types 1. injunction- Court order to stop polluting activity a. property rule- government tells property owners what they can and cannot do with their property i. Ex. shut down company or change hours, types of operation (cant use open pits, etc.), etc. 2. Damages- defendants pay plaintiffs a. Liability rule- b. People unhappy because putting a price on invaluable things like lungs, fear, etc. Madison v. Ducktown Sulfur Reducing copper ore plants o Smoke injures trees and crops o Renders homes less comfortable and land less profitable Smoke Output has not increased since 1891 o Defendants have tried to come up with more efficient methods Spent $200,000 but no solution Plaintiffs want an injunction 100% economic loss for Ducktown Sulfur o Plant great benefit to people of Polk County (jobs, taxes, etc.) NO INJUNCTION passed because of great loss county would face if plant closed State of Conn. Et al. v. American Electric Power
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Plaintiffs Conn., NY, Iowa, NJ, RI, Vermont, Wisconsin, NYC, Open Space Institute, etc. Defendants Am. Elec. Power Co., Am. Elec. Power Service, Southern Co., TVA, Xcel Energy, Cinergy Corporation Public nuisance of global warming o Defendants collectively emit 650 million tons of CO2 annually Plaintiffs want defendants to be liable for contributing to a public nuisance and for each defendant to cap its emissions and then reduce those emissions every year Defendants dismiss claim because o No federal common law to abate greenhouse gases o Separation of powers prevent court from making decision o Congress has displaced any federal common law Complaints are dismissed non-judicial o Judge Preska ruled that the Plaintiffs' claims raise non-justiciable political questions and should be dismissed. Specifically, the Court held that explicit statements of both Congress and the Executive branch over the years on the issue of global climate change in general and the federal government's specific refusal to impose limits on carbon dioxide emissions of the kind sought by the Plaintiffs made clear that making the initial policy determination as to how to address global climate change was vested in the other political branches and not the courts. Georgia v. Tenn. Copper
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 14

ENST 350 NOTES - ENST 350 January 15, 2008 USC- United...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online