Articles

Forest landowners deserve their day in court

March 15, 2010 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

Author: Damien M. Schiff Last week, I argued PLF's appeal in Barnum Timber Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.  PLF represents Barnum Timber Co., a family-run timber harvesting operation based in Eureka, California.  In this case, PLF is suing EPA over the agen ...

Articles

A property owner gets his day in court

February 04, 2011 | By DAMIEN SCHIFF

Yesterday, PLF scored a win in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Barnum Timber Co. v. EPA.  Pacific Legal Foundation represents Barnum Timber, a small, family-run timber company based in Humboldt County, California. Redwood Creek, which runs through Barnum’s timberlands, has been designated by EPA as an impaired waterbody under Section 3 ...

Articles

SCOTUS and global warming

February 10, 2011 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

Author:  Damien M. Schiff This week PLF filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court in support of the petitioners in American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut.  The case concerns whether federal courts can hear public nuisance cases that are based on the greenhouse gas emissions of large energy companies.  The Connec ...

Articles

Supreme Court fails to rein in class action abuse

April 23, 2012 | By DEBORAH LA FETRA

California’s hostile business climate is exemplified by the state’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), which invites plaintiffs with trivial and even nonexistent injuries to bombard companies with “consumer protection” lawsuits.  Because these lawsuits benefit the trial bar far more than consumers, California voters enacted Prop ...

Articles

The other mistake the Supreme Court made yesterday

June 29, 2012 | By DEBORAH LA FETRA

Largely lost in the hullaballoo yesterday, the Supreme Court dismissed First American v. Edwards as “improvidently granted.”  It did not give any reasons for the dismissal. This case asked whether a plaintiff who suffered no injury whatsoever from a defendant’s technical violation of statute could pursue a class action in federal ...

Articles

State standing to challenge ultra vires federal action

October 11, 2012 | By TIMOTHY SANDEFUR

I signed the agreement today to publish my article, State Standing to Challenge Ultra Vires Federal Action: The Health Care Cases And Beyond in the U. Florida Journal of Law & Public Policy. In it, I argue that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong to dismiss the Virginia lawsuit challenging Obamacare–a point I explained … ...

Articles

PLF's Official Statement on Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court's Prop. 8 case

June 26, 2013 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

Although Pacific Legal Foundation takes no position on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, PLF submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court solely on the issue of standing.  PLF argues that sponsors of any successful California initiative have standing to defend the measure in court if elected officials decline to do so.  Today, the & ...

Articles

Hollingsworth v. Perry : Supreme Court rules citizens can't "stand" in the way of politicians who ignore the law

June 26, 2013 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

Regardless of readers’ specific views on Prop. 8, today the Court decided an important question about standing — and it got it wrong.  Hollingsworth v. Perry will have serious repercussions that extend far beyond the same-sex marriage debate.  Today’s decision could spell disaster for any group that successfully sponsors an init ...

Articles

Can just anyone bring a class action on behalf of others?

December 23, 2013 | By ANASTASIA BODEN

Florence Pacleb sued Allstate Insurance for calling him on his cellphone in violation of anti-solitication laws.  Allstate offered to pay the damages Pacleb demanded and his attorney’s fees.  Most courts hold that once a defendant offers to fully satisfy a plaintiff’s claims, the plaintiff’s claims become moot, meaning that t ...