On October 20, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the conviction of a small businessman in Idaho for alleged technical violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the law that governs disposal of hazardous wastes. The decision was a setback for WLF, which represents the defendant and in July filed a certiorari petition seeking Supreme Court review. WLF’s client was convicted and sentenced to 21-months imprisonment for storing chemicals that prosecutors deemed “hazardous wastes.” The evidence at trial showed that the chemicals were not “waste” at all but rather were valuable products that the defendant was using in connection with his business. The Court’s one-sentence order did not explain the reasons for denying review. In its petition for certiorari, WLF argued that the lower courts misinterpreted RCRA and in essence denied the defendant the opportunity to demonstrate that he never abandoned the chemicals and thus that they were not “waste.”

Review denied.