Friends of the Earth, Inc., et al. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc. Country/Territory United States of America Type of court National - higher court Date Jan 12, 2000 Source UNEP, InforMEA Court name Supreme Court of the United States Seat of court Washington D.C. Judge GinsburgRehnquist, StevensOConnor, KennedySouterBreyer, Stevens, KennedyScaliaThomas Reference number No. 98-822 Language English Subject Water, Legal questions Keyword Access-to-justice Legal proceedings/administrative proceedings Effluent waste water/discharge Offences/penalties Recreational water use Abstract Defendant-respondent Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., bought a wastewater treatment plant in South Carolina. Laidlaw began to discharge various pollutants into the waterway. These discharges, particularly of mercury, repeatedly exceeded the limits set by a discharge permit Laidlaw had obtained. Plaintiff-petitioners Friends of the Earth filed this citizen suit against Laidlaw, alleging noncompliance with the permit and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of civil penalties. Laidlaw contended that the Plaintiff-petitioners lacked standing to bring the lawsuit. Laidlaw also argued that the case was moot because it had ceased polluting, and had closed the factory responsible for the pollution complained of. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff-petitioners had reasonable concerns about the effects of those discharges, directly affecting their recreational, aesthetic, and economic interests. This was enough to adequately document an injury in fact. Therefore the plaintiff-petitioners had standing to bring the suit. Besides that, a citizen suitor’s claim for civil penalties could not be dismissed as moot when the defendant, after commencement of the litigation, had come into compliance with its discharge permit. The violations could continue if undeterred by the fine sought. A case could only become moot if subsequent events made it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur. Full text getcase.pl References Cites Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary of the Interior, Petitioner v. Defenders of Wildlife et al. Jurisprudence | National - higher court | United States of America | Jun 12, 1992 Keyword: Protected animal species, Access-to-justice, Legal proceedings/administrative proceedings Source: UNEP, InforMEA Steel Co., aka Chicago Steel & Pickling Co. v. Citizens for a better Environment Jurisprudence | National - higher court | United States of America | Mar 4, 1998 Keyword: Access-to-justice, Legal proceedings/administrative proceedings, Hazardous substances, Access-to-information Source: UNEP, InforMEA Sierra Club, Petitioner, v. Rogers C.B. Morton, Individually, and as Secretary of the Interior of the United States, et a. Jurisprudence | National - higher court | United States of America | Apr 19, 1972 Keyword: Wild fauna, Legal proceedings/administrative proceedings, Protection forest, Protected area, NGO, Mountain area, National parks, Protection of habitats Source: UNEP, InforMEA Cited by Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, et al., Plaintiffs, v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al., Defendants Jurisprudence | National - lower court | United States of America | Mar 23, 2007 Keyword: Coal, Mountain area, Inland waters, Mining licence Source: UNEP, InforMEA