Legal Opinion
Animal Protection Institute v. Holsten
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided March 28, 2008No. Civil 06-3776 (MJD/RLE)PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
MICHAEL J. DAVIS, District Judge.
In their Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs Animal Protection Institute (“API”) and Center for Biological Diversity assert that Defendant Mark Holsten, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) has and is violating Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1538, by authorizing and allowing trapping and snaring activities that “take” Canada Lynx, which is listed as protected under the ESA. Amended Complaint ¶ 1. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- New York v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Printz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter, Communities for Great Ore.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- National Wildlife Federation, Great Bear Foundation v. Burlington Northern Railroad, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Strahan v. CoxeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Animal Welfare Institute v. MartinDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2008
- Coalition for a Sustainable Delta v. JOHN McCAMMANDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2010
- Animal Welfare Institute v. MartinDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2008
- Animal Welfare Institute v. MartinDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2009
- Aransas Project v. ShawDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2013
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.