San Francisco Baykeeper, Inc. v. Tosco Corporation, Diablo Services, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[t]o establish mootness, a defendant must show that the court cannot order any effective relief.” (citations omitted)
• holding that even though defendant had sold the facility and was no longer operating it, claims were not moot because facility was still operating and civil penalties imposed on defendant could also have deterrent effect on new or future owners
• holding that plaintiffs claim for civil penalties was not moot even though defendant firm sold the polluting facility at issue because the “facility is still operating, and there is a possibility that violations will recur at the facility.”
• finding that “[the defendant] is obviously in a better position than [the plaintiff] to identify the exact dates, or additional dates” on which violations occurred
• holding that even though defendant had sold the facility and was no longer operating it, claims were not moot because facility was still operating and civil penalties imposed on defendant could also have deterrent effect on new or future owners
• holding that “[o]nly when it is absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur will events following the commencement of a suit moot a claim for civil penalties.” (internal quotation marks- and citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).