United States Tenth Circuit

In a citizen-suit action, an order of the district court declining to impose a monetary penalty against defendant for violations of the Clean Air Act (CAA) is reversed and remanded where the district court: 1) erred in its consideration and application of factors in a CAA penalty analysis; 2) abused its discretion and erred in its attorney fee analysis because it did not consider whether plaintiff achieved some degree of success on the merits and by concluding that a party bringing a CAA claim is disqualified from receiving attorney fees solely because it is an economic competitor of the alleged violator.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/20/2007
• Published 08/21/2007

Judges

• BRISCOE, Circuit Judge., Before BRISCOE, EBEL, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Brett E. Nelson, (Gregory M. Gotwald with him on the briefs), Plews Shadley Racher & Braun, Indianapolis, IN, for Plaintiff-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Paul S. Penticuff, (John W. Cowden with him on the brief), Baker, Sterchi, Cowden & Rice, L.L.C., Overland Park, KS, for Defendant-Appellee.