United States v. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the citizen is meant to play the “more modest role” of intervenor, which carries important rights, including the ability to enforce a consent decree
• “The Alliance’s main argument on appeal 12 can be summed up as: ‘it just won’t work.’”
• “That the settlement of a given case takes the world as it exists, however, does not show a lack of diligent prosecution or a substantively unreasonable outcome.”
• No private litigation under the Clean Water Act “may be ‘commenced’ if the EPA or a state ‘has commenced and is diligently prosecuting a civil … action’ about the same matter the private litigant wants to raise.”
• \Even the most diligent litigator may conclude that settlement is the best option -- if only because it frees up enforcement resources for use elsewhere -- and to achieve a settlement a litigant must accept something less than the most favorable outcome.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).