Legal Opinion · Dissent

Libby Rod and Gun Club v. John Poteat

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 15, 1979No. 78-3297, 78-3307Published

1DissentKennedy, Circuit Judge

The principal holding of the court is that construction of the Libby reregulating dam does not have authorization or consent from Congress. As I can agree with neither the reasoning used to reach that conclusion nor the majority’s analysis of the precedents bearing on the case, I respectfully dissent.

At the outset, it should be understood that the language of 33 U.S.C. § 401 assists us in resolving certain preliminary matters, but it does not answer the ultimate question we face. It is relevant, though not especially helpful, in determining whether or not the plaintiffs have a private right…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Greene v. McElroySupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  4. Field v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  5. Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Corps of Engineers of the United States ArmyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1972

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

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

Powered by the Exa API