528 U.S. 167 (2000) Cited 7,140 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing
Holding that § 1252(b) funneled an ineffective-assistance challenge into a petition for review because the challenge was "inextricably intertwined with" the alien's "removal proceeding"
Holding that the fact that the citizen plaintiffs intervened in (and were thus actually parties to) the government enforcement action "mak[es] privity irrelevant"
Holding that where additional violations listed in the complaint originated from the same source, the CAFO dairies, deposited the same waste material, manure, into clearly identifiable navigable waters of the U.S., a single drain ditch, that they constituted a single violation that repeated over a span of time and met the CWA notice requirements
33 U.S.C. § 1319 Cited 1,154 times 18 Legal Analyses
Providing judicial review to "[a]ny person against whom a civil penalty is assessed under this subsection or who commented on the proposed assessment of such penalty"
40 C.F.R. § 135.3 Cited 220 times 1 Legal Analyses
Requiring notice that includes information sufficiently specific to allow the recipient to identify the "standard, limitation, or order" allegedly violated