Legal Opinion
Fund for Animals v. Hall
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 31, 2006No. Civil Action 03-0677 (RMU)PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
URBINA, District Judge.
Granting the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment; Denying the Defendants’ and Defendant-Intervenors’ Motions for Summary Judgment
I. INTRODUCTION
This case comes before the court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The plaintiffs allege that the Fish and Wildlife Service (the “FWS”) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321, et seq., and the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 706 et seq. Specifically, the plaintiffs claim that the defendants failed to analyze the cumulative effects of…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Casper Eugene Harding v. Vincent GrayCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- Dennis Diamond, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Brian Atwood, Administrator, Agency for International Development, Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water v. Natural Resources Defense CounCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- In Re Polar Bear Endangered Species Act ListingDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Fund for Animals v. HallDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. SalazarDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water v. Natural Resources Defense CounCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.