Back to Blog
Hillsboro garbage5/19/2023 We said in dicta in Woodfeathers that the force of this piece of legislative history was debatable because the Interstate Commerce Commission ("ICC") case law, which Congress was told did not consider garbage and refuse "property," is equivocal as to whether it could be "property" or not. The historic responsibility of local governments to ensure safe and comprehensive garbage collection posts a strong caution against the possibility that Congress lightly would preempt local regulation in this field. Sanitary Reduction Works of San Francisco, 199 U.S. One could hardly imagine an area of regulation that has been considered to be more intrinsically local in nature than collection of garbage and refuse, upon which may rest the health, safety, and aesthetic well-being of the community. Kleenwell Biohazard Waste and General Ecology Consultants, Inc. Our precedent has recognized the strong local governmental interest in regulating garbage collection. § 6901(a) (4) (stating that "the collection and disposal of solid waste should continue to be primarily the function of State, Regional and local agencies"). NELSON and GOULD, Circuit Judges.Ĭongress has recognized that waste hauling is a traditional state and local function subject to state regulation. King, District Judge, Presiding.īefore HUG, T.G. Thompson, Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, San Francisco, CA, for amici curiae.Īppeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Garr M. Welsh, Burke, Williams & Sorenen, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, James K. Lai, Yarmuth Wilsdon Calfo PLLC, Seattle, WA, John Kelly Astor, Astor & Phillips, John J. Kortum, Archer Norris, Richmond, CA, Vicki W.W. DuBoff, Wright & Talisman, P.C., Washington, DC, Richard E. Rocklin, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, OR, Scott M. Beattie, Lindsay, Hart, Neil & Weigler, LLP, Portland, OR, John Douglas Moore, Henn, Etzel and Moore, Inc., Oakland, CA, Robert B. Martin, Department of Justice Civil Division, Washington, DC, for intervenor. Batchelor and Paul Bierly, Markowitz, Herbold, Glade & Mehlhaf, P.C., Portland, OR, for plaintiff-appellee. Herald, Preston Gates & Ellis LLP, Portland, OR, for intervenors-appellants and defendant-intervenor-appellant. Frank Hammond, Cable Huston Benedict Haagensen & Lloyd LLP, Edward J. Scheiderich, City Attorney's Office, Beaverton, OR, for the defendants-appellants.īarnes H. Olsen, Washington County Counsel, Hillsboro, OR, and Williams J. Don's Garbage Service Garbarino Disposal & Recycling Service Inc., Intervenors,andcity of Beaverton, Defendant-appellant, 281 F.3d 1324 (9th Cir. Washington County, Defendant,oregon Refuse & Recycling Association, Defendant-intervenor.pride Disposal Co. Don's Garbage Service Garbarino Disposal & Recycling Service Inc., Intervenors,oregon Refuse & Recycling Association, Defendant-intervenor.agg Enterprises, Oregon Corporation, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Washington County, Defendant-appellant, Andcity of Beaverton, Defendant,pride Disposal Co. Don's Garbage Service Garbarino Disposal & Recycling Service Inc., Intervenors-appellants,oregon Refuse & Recycling Association, Defendant-intervenor.agg Enterprises, Oregon Corporation, Plaintiff-appellee,united States of America, Intervenor, v. Washington County City of Beaverton, Defendants,pride Disposal Co. West Beaverton Sanitary Service Inc., Intervenors, Andoregon Refuse & Recycling Association, Defendant-intervenor-appellant.agg Enterprises, Oregon Corporation, Plaintiff-appellee, v. 2002) :: JustiaĪgg Enterprises, Oregon Corporation, Plaintiff-appellee,united States of America, Intervenor, v. Agg Enterprises, Oregon Corporation, Plaintiff-appellee,united States of America, Intervenor, v.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |