Sample Case Study on USA v. Hayes Int’l Corp & Louis Beasley

USA v. Hayes Intl Corp

Title and citation

This is a court case involving the United States of America v. Hayes International Corporation and Luis Beasley. This entails illegal conveying of hazardous waste and this is central to the appeal that has been filed. Accordingly, the district court had not held the jury`s verdict based on insufficient evidence of knowledge to support convictions of the defendants.


This case involves the United States government and Hayes international, regarding waste disposal in respect to the environment. The statement of the law under question reads as follows, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which is a regulatory scheme that guarantees proper disposal of hazardous wastes. It also requires generators of wastes to identify hazardous waste by using manifested structure to allow only disposal of such wastes in facilities with permits. In 1982, administration bureaucrats came to know and classify barrels of unwanted material generated by Hayes, which were illegally disposed of by Performance advantage. More than six hundred drums of waste had been deposited among seven illegal disposal sites in Georgia. Beasley and Hayes were each sentenced of eight reckonings of sacrilegious 42 U.S.C. §6928(d) (1). This offers criminal sanctions of any individual who knowingly conveys any hazardous waste listed under this subchapter to a facility without a permit under section 6925 of the title.


Legislature never offered any direction in the decree nor the lawmaking history concerning the denotation of knowing in unit 6928(d). In various cases, the court held that offense required no mental element, only requisite actions. Section 6928(d) does not show illegality as an element of defense. Based on this, it would be no justification in appealing no information that the paint waste was a perilous waste within the sense of protocols.


Accordingly, rulings of exoneration besides the findings to both respondents were evacuated and the case was remanded to the district court to enter judgment in accordance with the jury’s verdict of guilty.


From testimonies, Beasley violated the company`s procedure and he knew the disposition of the waste was improper. Beasley knew the wastes were hazardous. At the same time, Hayes and a performance advantage had full knowledge of the wastes and the facility`s lack of proper permit.