Legal Opinion
Hoopa Valley Tribe v. United States Bureau of Reclamation
District Court, E.D. California
Decided December 29, 2022No. 1:20-cv-01814Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE, Case No. 1:20-cv-1814-JLT-EPG 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS MOTION TO INTERVENE AS OF RIGHT 13 v. (Doc. 102) 14 UNITED STATES BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 I. INTRODUCTION 19 Westlands Water District (“Westlands”) seeks intervention as of right under Federal Rule 20 of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 24(a), or, alternatively, permissive intervention under Rule 24(b). 21 (Doc. 102.) Federal Defendants take no position on the motion. (Doc. 103.) The Hoopa…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Stauffer Chemical Company, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance Company, Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Monsanto Company Reichhold Limited Fmc Corporation Bridgestone/firestone, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Stringfellow v. Concerned Neighbors in ActionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Makah Indian Tribe v. C. William VerityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Donnelly v. GlickmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Wilderness Society v. United States Forest ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.