• Altamaha Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Rayonier Performance Fibers, LLC et al.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-11
    Practice Area: Energy and Natural Resources | Environmental Law
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Presiding Judge Ellington
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert Brown, Megan Huynh (Southern Environmental Law Center), Atlanta; Donald Stack (Stack & Associates PC), Atlanta; Keri Powell (Law Office of Keri N Powell LLC), Decatur, for appellant.
    for defendant: Patricia Barmeyer, Randall Butterfield, Stephen McCullers (King & Spalding LLP), Atlanta; James Durham (Hall Booth Smith P.C.), Brunswick; Isaac Byrd (Deputy Attorney General), Atlanta; Christopher Carr (Attorney General), James Coots (Senior Assistant Attorney General), Atlanta; Graham Barron (GA Department of Law), Atlanta, for appellee. Georgia Industry Environmental Coalition Inc, Atlanta; Douglas Henderson (Troutman Sanders), Atlanta; Georgia Riverkeepers, Decatur; Charles Cork (Attorney at Law), Decatur, for amicus curiae.

    Case Number: A18A0594

    Environmental Protection Division's Interpretation of Narrative Standard in Regulation Governing Pollution Discharge Into Rivers Was Entitled to Deference

  • C&M Enterprises of Georgia, LLC v. Williams

    Publication Date: 2018-07-03
    Practice Area: Administrative Law | Environmental Law | Land Use and Planning
    Industry:
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Presiding Judge Ellington
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jeffery Arnold (Attorney at Law), Hinesville; Robert Silliman, George Darden (Dentons US LLP), Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Christopher Carr (Attorney General), Atlanta; Elizabeth Monyak (Assistant Attorney General), Atlanta, for appellee.

    Case Number: A18A0240

    An administrative law judge did not act arbitrarily or capriciously and did not abuse or exceed its discretion in ruling in favor of Georgia Department of Natural Resources in a dispute over the construction of a bulkhead in an area of marshlands Department determined to be protected and under its jurisdiction.

  • Georgia Pacific Consumer Products, LP v. Ratner, et al.

    Publication Date: 2018-04-18
    Practice Area: Environmental Law | Real Estate
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Presiding Judge Doyle
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David Hudson (Hull Barrett, PC), Augusta; Edward Hughes (Callaway, Braun, Riddle & Hughes, PC), Savannah; Quentin Marlin, Ryburn Ratterree, Philip Thompson (Ellis Painter Ratterree & Adams LLP), Savannah, for appellant.
    for defendant: John Bell (Bell & Brigham), Augusta; Timothy Roberts, Benjamin Perkins (Oliver Maner LLP), Savannah, for appellee.

    Case Number: A17A1969

    In plaintiffs' suit alleging that a paper mill damaged their property and interfered with the use and enjoyment of their property, the Court reversed the denial of the mill's motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs' claim for nuisance, as the mill was immune from nuisance liability under Georgia's right to farm statute, and found that the mill was entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims for negligence, trespass, and all derivative claims.

  • Barrow v. Dunn

    Publication Date: 2018-04-05
    Practice Area: Environmental Law | Government
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Presiding Judge Barnes
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Malissa Kaufold-Wiggins, Tyler Bishop (Balch & Bingham LLP), Atlanta; Hugh McNatt, Hugh Peterson (McNatt, Greene & Peterson, PC.) Vidalia; Jonathan Schwartz (Jon L. Schwartz, Attorney at Law, P.C.), Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Isaac Byrd (Deputy Attorney General), Atlanta; Christopher Carr (Attorney General), Atlanta; Suzanne Osborne (Department of Law), Atlanta; John Hennelly (Assistant Attorney General), Atlanta; James Coots (Senior Assistant Attorney General), Atlanta, for appellee. Ray Smith (Attorney at Law), Richmond Hill, for other party.

    Case Number: A17A1385

    Environmental Protection Division Granted Wastewater Treatment Facility Permit Without Conducting Required Antidegradation Analysis

  • Viad Corp v. United States Steel Corporation

    Publication Date: 2018-02-08
    Practice Area: Environmental Law | Toxic Torts
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Judge Branch
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Alston & Bird, Daniel F. Diffley, Kyle G. A. Wallace, Annalise K. Peters; Moore Clarke DuVall & Rodgers, James H. Moore III, Matthew D. DeMott, for appellant.
    for defendant: Watson Spence, Louis E. Hatcher, Alfreda L. Sheppard, F. Faison Middleton IV, Christopher L. Foreman, for appellee.

    Case Number: A17A0937

    Plaintiff could not claim indemnity for its own negligence after State ordered it and its predecessor to pay for environmental remediation of certain property because the assumption agreement did not expressly, plainly, clearly and unequivocally provide that predecessor would indemnify plaintiff to that extent; accordingly, the trial court erred in granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in its suit for indemnification.