Court Documents

In this case, students and faculty in the Environmental Law Clinic are serving as lawyers to the Waterkeeper Alliance, an environmental citizens group. The decision to represent Waterkeepers was made carefully by a UM Carey Law professor with decades of environmental litigation experience representing corporate clients, after a full examination of the facts and law involved.

The Waterkeepers can bring this suit because the Clean Water Act has a special provision that allows citizens to enforce the existing law, protecting environmental resources that are valuable to the public as a whole. The suit alleges that Perdue and its grower have violated the Clean Water Act by polluting the Chesapeake Bay.

All parties to the suit filed motions for summary judgment, which the judge denied. The trial began on October 9, 2012 and concluded October 23. Closing arguments will be made November 30, 2012.

• Pleadings
  • Complaint
  • Perdue Answer
  • Hudson Answer
• Motion to Dismiss
  • Perdue Memorandum
  • Hudson Memorandum
  • Waterkeeper Opposition
  • Perdue Reply to Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss
  • Hudson Farm Reply to Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss
  • Court Order and Opinion Denying Motion to Dismiss
• Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment
  • Waterkeeper Alliance Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Perdue Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Hudson Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Waterkeeper Alliance Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Perdue Opposition to Waterkeeper Alliance Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Hudson Farm Opposition to Waterkeeper Alliance Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Waterkeeper Alliance Final Reply to the Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Perdue Final Reply to the Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Hudson Farm Final Reply to the Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Court Order and Opinion Denying Motions for Summary Judgment
• Trial Memos
  • Trial Memorandum of Waterkeeper Alliance
  • Trial Memorandum of Perdue Farms, Inc.
  • Trial Memorandum of Alan and Kristin Hudson Farm
• Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
  • Memorandum in Support of Waterkeeper’s Proposed Findings and Conclusions
  • Memorandum in Support of Perdue’s Proposed Findings and Conclusions
  • Waterkeeper’s Proposed Findings and Conclusions
  • Perdue’s Proposed Findings and Conclusions
  • Alan Hudson’s Proposed Findings and Conclusions
• Responses to Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
  • Waterkeeper Alliance Response Memo
  • Waterkeeper Alliance Response Attachment A
  • Waterkeeper Alliance Response Attachment B
  • Perdue Response Memo
  • Perdue Response Attachment 1
  • Perdue Response Attachment 2
  • Hudson Farm Response Memo
• Judge William Nickerson’s Order, December 20, 2012.
  • Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. v. Alan Hudson et al.

Related Links

• Home
• UM Carey Law Role
• An Overview
• Court Documents
• Trial Transcripts
• Media Coverage
• Public Officials’ Concerns
• Expressions of Support
• Politics & Law School Clinics
• FAQ: Citizen Suits & the Clean Water Act
• UM Carey Law Clinics
• Make a Gift
• Contact

UM | About This Site | Site Map | Contact Us