CN-2

Card Set Information

Author:
jneuhauser
ID:
269787
Filename:
CN-2
Updated:
2014-04-08 11:48:50
Tags:
CN
Folders:
CN
Description:
CN
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user jneuhauser on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. US v. Utah
    CO River navigable even though not previously used for commerce based on lack of pop b/c it was SUSCEPTIBLE to nav for commerce when necessary
  2. Econ Light and Power v. US
    Once navigable, always navigable, even if no longer navigable in fact
  3. 33 US 407/RHA 14
    • Refuse Act-unlawful to throw, discharge from any ship/shore any refuse matter of any kind into NWUS
    • -exception: flowing from streets/sewes
  4. 33 USC 403/RHA 10
    • no wharves, piers, etc w/o COE permit
    • no excavation/filling of waters w/o COE permit
  5. 33 USC 401/RHA 9
    Unlawful to construct bridge, causeway, am, or dike over any NWUS w/o Congressional approval
  6. Citizens Committee for the Hudson Valley v. Volpe
    COE permit voided. A dike being built in the NWUS required C consent to do it. Ct said a dike was a dike.
  7. Hart and Miller Islands Area Env Group v. COE
    Ct held that only dikes requiring auth under Sec 9 are those that entirely span a navigable waterway such that it obstructs the waterway's navigability. Agreed w/ COE that not all dikes are equal and this was a Sec 10 structure b/c it was a fill b/t 2 islands and still could get around the islands. COE regs now say Sec 9 only req if dike spans entire waterway
  8. US v. Steamer Montello
    Historic Test. Fox river had rapids and falls that were removed. Prior to improvement, there had been some commerce carried out by Durham boats pulled by animals.
  9. Steamer Daniel Ball v. US
    • 2 part test:
    • 1) Navigable in Fact in its natural, unimproved condition presently used/susceptible to being used in its ordinary condition for water-borne commerce
    • 2) must constitute wither by itself or in onj w/ other waters a continuous highway of waterborne commerce among states and foreign countries
  10. Gibbons v. Ogden
    Congressional power over commerce includes power over navigation and NWUS
  11. Steamer Montello
    • 2nd prong-used for ISC
    • 1st prong-historic used test. If used for water-borne commerce in its natural state in the past, regardless of whether portage req'd at places, then it is a NWUS
  12. ELP v. US
    doctrine of indelible navigability. It was used for commercial navigation in the 1700s for fur trappers. Bc it had once been navigable in teh past, now navigable in law
  13. US v. App Power Co
    Ct sai it was a NWUS if it could be made navigable in fact w/ "reasonable improvements" (1872 USACE study, but never funded)
  14. US v. Utah
    Stretch of CO River held to be navigable wven though it was never used for commercial navĀ  b/c if it ever did become necessary, it could navigate it, even if difficult and portage

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview