Legal Opinion

W.M. Barr & Co. v. South Coast Air Quality Management District

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 28, 2012No. B233892PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*412Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

In July 2010, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (the District) adopted “Rule 1143,” which required manufacturers of consumer paint thinner and solvent products to limit the use of ozone-forming volatile organic compounds (VOC’s) in their products in order to meet the District’s commitment under the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq.) and the California Clean Air Act (Health & Saf. Code, § 40910 et seq.).1 The District believed that the adoption of Rule 1143 would result in manufacturers substituting acetone for VOC’s in their products, and prepared…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Ray v. Atlantic Richfield Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Hassan v. Mercy American River HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Franco v. Arakelian Enterprises, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2015
  2. Pesticide Action Network N. Am. v. Cal. Dep't of Pesticide Regulation, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  3. Franco v. Arakelian EnterprisesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  4. In re: Exide Technologies, LLCDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2020
  5. Pesticide Action Network etc. v. Cal. Dept. of Pesticide Reg.California Court of Appeal · 2017

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

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

Powered by the Exa API