• ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS

United States Court of Appeals, for The Third Circuit

State of Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Vs. US Army Corps of Engineers (Decided on 03.07.2012)

Whether the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can deepen the main channel of the Delaware River by five feet, enabling river ports to be economically competitive and at the same time, comply with statutes that protect the environment?

Held, In the present case, for over twenty years, the U.S Army Corps of Engineers had devoted substantial efforts evaluating the proposed five foot deepening project for the Delaware River. It had published three comprehensive NEPA reports, received multiple rounds of public comments, and had immeasurable communications with the relevant state and federal agencies. Its decision in 2009 to proceed with the project was consistent with NEPA, the CWA, and the CZMA. Accordingly, this Court affirmed the judgments of the District Courts of New Jersey and Delaware.

• CRIMINAL LAWS

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

United States Vs. Esso (Decided on 27.06.2012)

Conviction - Challenge thereto - Present Appeal filed against conviction of Respondent following a jury trial in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York of two charges arising from a mortgage fraud scheme

Held, In the present situation, allowing the jury to take home the indictment or the jury instructions "leaves the deliberative process needlessly vulnerable to a variety of potential problems" by "increasing the chances that individual jurors may want to discuss these matters with family members or friends" and by "making it easier for jurors to research legal issues on their own." Accordingly, while the conviction of Respondent was being affirmed but the Court's opinion should not be taken as a general endorsement of the practice of permitting the jury to take the indictment home.