Legal Opinion
California River Watch v. County of Sonoma
District Court, N.D. California
Decided July 10, 2014No. C 14-00217 WHAPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
WILLIAM ALSUP, United States District Judge
INTRODUCTION
In this action brought under Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act, defendant *1206moves to dismiss and/or strike allegations in the first amended complaint. For the reasons stated herein, the first amended complaint is Dismissed Without Prejudice. The County has voluntarily agreed to provided limited relief.
STATEMENT
This action involves alleged violations of Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq., with respect to an alleged unauthorized “take” of the Sonoma County…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ohio Forestry Assn., Inc. v. Sierra ClubSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Strahan v. CoxeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1997
- Marbled Murrelet v. BabbittCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Marbled Murrelet v. BabbittCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Southwest Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of ReclamationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Puyallup Tribe of Indians v. Electron Hydro LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2024