Legal Opinion
Alaska Limestone Corp. v. Hodel
District Court, D. Alaska
Decided April 12, 1985No. A 82-392 CivilPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FITZGERALD, Chief Judge.
This cause comes before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment. The litigation raises important issues of statutory construction, administrative procedure and judicial review surrounding the government’s implementation of federal mining laws in the national parks. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s (Alaska Limestone’s) summary judgment motion is now denied and defendants’ (the government’s) motion for summary judgment will be granted.
FACTS
On November 25, 1958, Alaska Limestone properly recorded a number of unpatented limestone mining claims…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Federal Crop Ins. Corp. v. MerrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Runyon v. McCrarySupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Schweiker v. HansenSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Posadas v. National City BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Merdes v. UnderwoodAlaska Supreme Court · 1987
- Alaska Limestone Corp. v. HodelDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1985
- Merdes v. UnderwoodAlaska Supreme Court · 1987