Legal Opinion
Bonnichsen v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 4, 2004No. Nos. 02-35994, 02-35996PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
The opinion published at 357 F.3d 962 (9th Cir.2004) filed on February 4, 2004 is amended so that footnote 20 should read:
In so holding, we necessarily determine that no reasonable person could conclude on this record that Kennewick Man is “Native American” under NAG-PRA. See Allentown Mack Sales & Serv., Inc. v. NLRB, 522 U.S. 359, 366-67, 118 S.Ct. 818, 139 L.Ed.2d 797 (1998) (holding that under the substantial evidence standard the reviewing court “must decide whether on this record it would have been possible for a reasonable jury to reach the [agency’s] conclusion”).
With this…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Bennett v. SpearSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Safe Air for Everyone v. MeyerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Wolfson v. BrammerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Timothy White v. University of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Atlantic Recording Corp. v. Project Playlist, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2009
- M. S. v. Kate BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.