Kurt Froebel v. George E. Meyer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that removed dam was not a “point source” because that term “connotes the terminal end of an artificial system for moving water, waste, or other materials”
• recognizing that a degree of leniency applies to the failure to raise all possible grounds for affirmance
• recognizing that a degree of leniency applies to the failure to raise all possible grounds for affirmance
• concluding that the plaintiff was required to first raise in state court his claim that the DNR violated the Clean Water Act by discharging a pollutant without a permit
• explaining that under Wisconsin preclusion law, state officials are viewed as identical to the agency they work for when complaints against them concern only their actions as employees of the agency
• federal Clean Water Act claim should have been brought in state administrative and court tribunals, not federal courts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).