Vogel v. Marathon Oil Corporation
North Dakota Supreme Court
1DissentKapsner, Justice
[¶ 52] I respectfully dissent. Vogel has asserted a proper cause of action under the Environmental Law Enforcement Act of 1975 (“ELEA”). The majority’s holding both frustrates the purpose of the ELEA and disregards its plain language.
[¶ 53] In paragraphs 23 and 24, the majority quotes N.D.C.C. § 32-40-06, which authorizes a person aggrieved by the violation of an environmental statute to bring action in district court and acknowledges that N.D.C.C. § 32-40-03(2) is an environmental statute as defined by the ELEA. However, the majority’s holding eviscerates the ELEA by requiring an aggrieved…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ray v. Mason County Drain CommissionerMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
- Trade 'N Post, L.L.C. v. World Duty Free Americas, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
- Preserve the Dunes, Inc v. Department of Environmental QualityMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- State Ex Rel. Schaller v. County of Blue EarthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Meier v. NovakNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.