Legal Opinion · Dissent

Brandt-Erichsen v. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 15, 1993No. 91-35835Published

1DissentHug, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent. I would reverse the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of appellees because the district court erred in determining that Brandt-Erichsen failed to obtain a “receipt upon final entry” for purposes of 43 U.S.C. § 1165 (1988).

I. The Statutes

As we observed in Grewell v. Watt, 664 F.2d 1380 (9th Cir.1982), both the statute under which Brandt-Erichsen claims his site, 43 U.S.C. § 687a (1982) (repealed effective 1986),1 and the statute which he argues barred the BLM’s contest after two years, 43 U.S.C. § 1165, had their genesis in an 1891…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Fu-Kong Tzung Jean Tzung v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, and Does 1 Through 100, InclusiveCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
  3. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, As Receiver v. O'melveny & MeyersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  4. Marathon Oil Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  5. Aleknagik Natives Ltd. v. AndrusCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API