United States of America, and Cross v. Earth Sciences, Inc., and Cross

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that certain activities may involve both point and nonpoint source discharge of pollutants, but only \those from point sources are subject to regulation\
• holding that sump pit “discharge, whether from a fissure in [its] dirt berm or overflow of [its] wall” is an “escape of liquid from [a] confined system” and, therefore, “from a point source”
• concluding that overflows or leaks from “sump pit” were from a point source
• finding that a “closed circulating system” may be a point source when it fails and liquid escapes
• finding that excess fluid escaping a closed industrial system is point source pollution, even though “the source of the excess liquid is rainfall or snow melt”
• “combination of sumps, ditches, hoses and pumps is a circulating or drainage system to serve” a mining operation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).