We represented Halaco in a dispute with the Coastal Commission relating to property development permits in a Coastal Zone per the California Coastal Act. The Coastal Commission demanded that Halaco obtain a permit from it. Halaco contended that it possessed a vested right such that it was not required to obtain such a permit. Halaco’s position was sustained by the Superior Court, the Court of Appeals, and ultimately by the Supreme Court. Halaco Engineering Co. v. South Central Coast Regional Commission et al., 42 Cal.3d 52, 720 P.2d 15, 227 Cal. Rptr. 667.

We represented Halaco in a suit against the EPA regarding point source discharges. The District Court dismissed EPA’s claims against Halaco after we unearthed evidence that EPA had doctored a key report and, separately, characterized Halaco’s waste as "hazardous" when it knew such was not the case. The 9th Circuit, while deciding dismissal was too severe a sanction, returned the matter to the District Court with instructions to impose any other restrictions that the District Court deemed appropriate. EPA quickly settled. Halaco Engineering Co. v. Costle, 843 F. 2d 376 (9th Cir. 1988).

Defended a Southern California based industrial company against charges of violations of the Clean Water Act and Resource Conservation Recovery Act filed by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency, ultimately resulting in dismissals with prejudice of the actions.

Represented McLaughlin, Gormley & King, the distributor of an active ingredient found in aircraft insecticides, in class action litigation by pilots and flight attendants claiming injury from exposure to the insecticides on international flights. At the same time, we represented the distributor in coverage litigation with numerous carriers relating to the class action. We were successful in defeating the underlying claims through various pretrial motions. The coverage litigation has not yet been fully resolved, but our client’s insurers have paid the bulk of all defense costs.

Represented landowners in Southern California opposing the construction of a biomass operation on adjacent property. We were able to demonstrate that the agencies involved had failed to follow the proper environmental procedures including completion of a full environmental impact report (EIR). The project was abandoned.

Represented land owners in Southern California opposed to Imperial Irrigation District plans to run a new high voltage 230 KV power line across their property in a manner which would have ruined a carefully constructed specific plan for development of the site. This matter ultimately involved five separate suits, all of which proceeded to the court of appeals, and all of which were resolved in the clients’ favor. The Imperial Irrigation District abandoned its plans and proceeded with an alternative solution previously deemed unfeasible.