Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.

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

Beard v. Banks

Holding that encouraging progress toward rehabilitation serves legitimate penological objectives

Sierra Club v. Morton

Holding that plaintiff-organization did not establish Article III standing for injunctive relief where the organization failed to show that its members would be affected by the actions it sought to enjoin

Rapanos v. U.S.

Holding that "[t]he use of the definite article and the plural number ('waters')" made clear that § 1362 is limited to "fixed bodies of water," such as "streams, ... oceans, rivers, lakes," and does not extend to "ordinarily dry channels through which water occasionally or intermittently flows"

Sierra Club, Lone Star Chap. v. Cedar Point Oil

Holding courts may determine in citizen suits whether discharged substance is pollutant even if EPA has not issued NPDES permit

Ecological Rights Foundation v. Pac. Lumber

Holding that under Rhodes, plaintiffs had standing to challenge the Forest Service's exclusion of certain classes of actions from procedural safeguards designed to determine the environmental impact of those actions, and that plaintiffs had an informational injury justifying standing as well, where the alleged violation prevented them from commenting on or challenging the agency's decision

Environmental Defense Ctr., Inc. v. U.S.E.P.A.

Holding that the compelled disclosure of educational materials about the hazards of stormwater discharges and the proper disposal of waste “involve[d] no compelled recitation of a message and no affirmation of belief” because “[i]nforming the public about safe toxin disposal is non-ideological,” and nothing prohibited a regulated entity “from stating its own views about the proper means of managing toxic materials”

Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Section 1251 - Congressional declaration of goals and policy

Designating the Administrator of the EPA to "administer this chapter"

Section 1365 - Citizen suits

Granting Administrator right to intervene in citizen suits

Section 1311 - Effluent limitations

Imposing general prohibition on "the discharge of any pollutant by any person"

Section 1342 - National pollutant discharge elimination system

Granting EPA the authority to require a permit for such discharges

Section 1362 - Definitions

Defining “pollutant” to include “rock”

Section 122.26 - Storm water discharges (applicable to State NPDES programs, see Section 123.25)

Requiring permits for discharges from oil and gas activities that contribute to a violation of a water quality standard

Section 401.15 - Toxic pollutants

Listing copper, arsenic, lead and zinc under Clean Water Act § 307

Appendix A to Part 423 - 126 Priority Pollutants