Hawaii Wildlife Fund et al v. County of Maui
| Hawaii Wildlife Fund, Sierra Club - Maui Group, Surfrider Foundation and West Maui Preservation Association |
| County of Maui |
| 1:2012cv00198 |
| April 16, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Hawaii Office |
| Maui |
| BARRY M. KURREN |
| SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY |
| Environmental Matters |
| 33 U.S.C. ยง 1319 Clean Water Act |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
505
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S 504 AMENDED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT IN PART AND DENY IN PART PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS. Signed by JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY. (cib)
|
|
Filing
497
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION re 486 . Signed by JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 10/20/2021. (cib)
|
|
Filing
479
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AMENDED ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT re: 468 - Signed by JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 7/26/2021. Ba sed on the undisputed evidence that the County discharged tens of thousands of gallons of wastewater from the LWRF into the Pacific Ocean on a daily basis at a few monitored seep vents, and balancing the factors set forth by the Supreme Court, as we ll as the additional volume factor that this court added, this court concludes that the LWRF must have an NPDES permit. The discharge from the County's injection wells into the groundwater and ultimately into the ocean is the functional equival ent of a direct discharge such that it triggers the NPDES permit requirement. The court would reach this same conclusion even if it did not consider any factor beyond the seven identified by the Supreme Court. Summary judgment is therefore granted in favor of Plaintiffs and against the County. The parties earlier entered into a Settlement Agreement and Order re: Remedies. See ECF No. 256 . Paragraph 5 of that agreement provides: In the even t of a remand, the Parties agree that the remedies provided for in this Agreement control and are binding, that no additional remedies shall be assessed and that this Agreement and the remedies provided herein resolve all remaining issues regarding t he remedy phase of the above-captioned lawsuit. Id., PageID # 7277. Given that language, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against the County pursuant to this amended order and the Settlement Agreement filed as ECF No. 256 . No further issues need to be determined by this court. Accordingly, after judgment is entered, the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. (jo)
|
|
Filing
468
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT re: 431 , 439 - Signed by JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 7/15/2021. Based on th e undisputed evidence that the County discharged tens of thousands of gallons of wastewater from the LWRF into the Pacific Ocean on a daily basis at a few monitored seep vents, and balancing the factors set forth by the Supreme Court, as well as the additional volume factor that this court added, this court concludes that the LWRF must have an NPDES permit. The discharge from the County's injection wells into the groundwater and ultimately into the ocean is the functional equivalent of a di rect discharge such that it triggers the NPDES permit requirement. The court would reach this same conclusion even if it did not consider the raw-volume-of-pollutant factor. Summary judgment is therefore granted in favor of Plaintiffs and against the County. This order does not address the remedies for the County's Clean Water Act violation. The parties earlier entered into a Settlement Agreement and Order re: Remedies. See ECF No. 256 . No later th an July 21, 2021, each side shall file a statement as to whether this or any other agreement regarding remedies is in effect or whether remedies for the County's violation of the Clean Water Act still need to be addressed. In the meantime, this case remains pending. Given this ruling, the court directs the Clerk of court to vacate the trial date and all pretrial deadlines, leaving only the remedies memorandum deadline for the parties to comply with at this time. (jo)
|
|
Filing
456
ORDER REGARDING COUNTER MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT re 431 , 439 . Signed by JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 5/26/2021. (cib)
|
|
Filing
438
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT COUNTY OF MAUIS REQUEST FOR A PRETRIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING PURSUANT TO RULE 702 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE re 422 . The court denies the County of Maui's motion for a pretrial evidentiary hearing pursu ant to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. This order is without prejudice to the raising of future challenges to the June 2013 Lahaina Groundwater Tracer Study or any evidence based on that study. Signed by JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 4/7/2021. (cib)
|
|
Filing
242
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON LACK OF FAIR NOTICE AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDING CIVIL PENALTIES re 172 , 176 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 6/25 /2015. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
184
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL AND DENYING MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS re 169 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 4/9/2015. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants reg istered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
162
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT re 124 , 128 , 145 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 1/23/2015. "Plain tiffs' motion for partial summary judgment is granted and the County's motion for partial summary judgment is denied. The requests for judicial notice are granted, and the requests to strike evidence are denied." (emt, ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
113
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STAY AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT re 71 , 72 , 80 , 81 , 89 , 108 - - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 5/30/2014. "The court denie s Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings or, in the alternative, a stay. The court grants Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment as to the County's liability under the Clean Water Act. The court makes no determina tion at this stage regarding any civil penalties. The court grants the County's two requests for judicial notice and denies the county's motion to strike expert declarations. Because Plaintiffs are prevailing on the substantive motions before this court, the court sees no need to address the merits of their Motion to Strike Defendants Second May 23, 2014 Letter. That motion is denied." (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants regist ered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS 8 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 8/8/12. -- "The court denies the motion to dismiss and the motion to strike exhibits.", re 8 ; 16 (emt, )CERTI FICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
