Legal Opinion
Moden v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided September 3, 2003No. Civil 02-305-JOPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERT E. JONES, District Judge.
In this lawsuit, plaintiffs Walt Moden, et al. (“Moden”) contend that defendants United States Fish and Wildlife Service, et al. (“FWS”), arbitrarily and capriciously denied plaintiffs’ petition to remove the Lost River and shortnose sucker fishes from the fist of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. Defendants have moved for summary judgment (# 33) on the first claim in the amended complaint, contending that the FWS properly denied the petition because it lacked “substantial commercial or…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Camp v. PittsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Florida Power & Light Co. v. LorionSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations v. U.S. Bureau of ReclamationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Center for Biological Diversity v. MorgenweckDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2004
- Colorado Environmental Coalition v. Office of Legacy ManagementDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2011
- Friends of Animals v. AsheDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Buffalo Field Campaign v. ZinkeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.