Legal Opinion
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. National Energy Policy Development Group
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 26, 2002No. CIV.A. 01-1530(EGS). No. CIV.A. 02-631(EGS)PublishedCited by 63 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SULLIVAN, District Judge.
Pending before this Court is non-agency defendants’ motion for certification of interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Upon careful consideration of this motion, the responses and reply thereto, the applicable statutory and case law, and for the following reasons, the defendants’ motion is hereby DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND
Defendants Vice-President Richard B. Cheney, the National Energy Policy Development Group (“NEPDG”), Andrew Lundquist, Joshua Bolten,. and Larry Lindsay 1 have recently filed with the United States Court of…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- United States v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Clinton v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Gonzaga University v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Alexander v. SandovalSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Camp v. PittsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Couch v. Telescope Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- APCC Services, Inc. v. Sprint Communications Co., LPDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2003
- Grosdidier v. Chairman, Broadcasting Board of GovernorsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Judicial Watch, Inc. v. United States Department of EnergyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2004
- Molock v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.