US Supreme Court Docket

Supreme Court Docket

Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | Unscheduled | Previous Terms
[Download January 8, 2007 Argument Calendar PDF]
[Download February Argument Calendar - Coming Soon]
[Click here for 2005 Docket]
Many documents listed on this page are PDF files that may be viewed using AdobeReader.

United Haulers Ass'n, Inc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Auth.
No. 05-1345 Title:

United Haulers Association, Inc., et al. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority, et al.

Subject:

Commerce Clause, Interstate Commerce, Solid Waste, Flow-Control Ordinance, Preferred Processing Facility

Question:

The Court held in C & A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown, 511 U.S. 383, 386 (1994), that "a so-called flow control ordinance, which require[d] all solid waste to be processed at a designated transfer station before leaving the municipality,' discriminated against interstate commerce and was invalid under the Commerce Clause because it "depriv[ed] competitors, including out-of-state firms, of access to a local market." This case presents two questions, the first of which is the subject of an acknowledged circuit conflict:


1. Whether the virtually per se prohibition against "hoard[ing] solid waste" (Id. at 392) recognized in Carbone is inapplicable when the "preferred processing facility" (ibid.) is owned by a public entity


2. Whether a flow-control ordinance that requires delivery of all solid waste to a publicly owned local facility and thus prohibits its exportation imposes so "insubstantial" a burden on interstate commerce that the provision satisfies the Commerce Clause if it serves even a "minimal" local benefit.

Decisions:

• U.S. Court of Appeals - 2nd Circuit Opinion Filed: February 16, 2006
• United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: September 26, 2006

Resources:

• Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket

Briefs:

    Parties

Petition Phase


• Certiorari Petition
• Brief in Opposition
• Reply to Brief in Opposition
• Amici Brief of the Am. Trucking Ass'ns, Inc. et al. in Support of Petitioners
  
  Merits Phase
  
  
• Petitioners' Brief
  
• Respondents' Brief
  
• Amici Brief of Sussex County, et al. in Support of Petitioners
  
• Amici Brief of the Am. Trucking Ass'ns, Inc. et al. in Support of Petitioners
  
  

Counsel of Record

For Petitioners United Haulers Association, Inc., et al..:

Evan Mark Tager
Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP
Washington, DC

For Respondents Oneida-Herkimer etc., et al.:

Michael J. Cahill
Germano & Cahill, P.C.
Holbrook, NY

Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | Unscheduled | Previous Terms

 

To view PDF files listed on this page you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader