Legal Opinion

United States v. Bay-Houston Towing Co., Inc.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided March 13, 2002No. 98-CV-73252PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION ON CIVIL PENALTIES

COHN, District Judge.

[[Image here]]

[[Image here]]

I. Introduction

A. Nature of the Case

This is the civil penalty phase of an environmental action brought by the United States at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to § 309 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq. EPA seeks in-junctive relief and civil penalties relating to defendant Bay-Houston Towing Company, Inc.’s Michigan Peat Division’s (Michigan Peat) 1 peat mining 2 activities on 950 acres of land in Minden Township, Sanilac County, Michigan on a parcel known as…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  4. Amoco Production Co. v. Village of GambellSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Weinberger v. Romero-BarceloSupreme Court of the United States · 1982

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Michigan Farm Bureau v. Department of Environmental QualityMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2003
  3. Bay-Houston Towing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
  4. Department of Environmental Quality v. Hernan F GomezMichigan Court of Appeals · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API