Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Beatty v. Fish & Wildlife Commission

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided January 15, 2015No. 31409-0-IIIPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*432¶1 — Bruce Beatty applied for a hydraulic mining permit to operate a suction dredge on Fortune Creek outside of the work window dates established by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Gold and Fish pamphlet. The WDFW granted the permit but included a condition that limited suction dredging to the dates within the work window. The WDFW informed Mr. Beatty that his request to operate a suction dredge outside the work window could still be granted if he provided site specific information that allowed the WDFW to assess the impact to fish life. Mr. Beatty refused and appealed…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Arizona v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
  3. Tapper v. Employment Security DepartmentWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  4. California Coastal Commission v. Granite Rock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Port of Seattle v. Pollution Control Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2004

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. People v. RinehartCalifornia Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Seattle City Light, Respondent, v. Aaron Swanson, AppellantCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
  3. Snohomish County v. Pollution Control Hearings BoardCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
  4. Donald And Kathleen Miller v. City Of SammamishCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  5. State Of Washington, V. Meta Platforms, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2024

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API