Legal Opinion
Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency & Scott Pruitt
District Court, D. Montana
Decided March 25, 2019No. CV-16-52-GF-BMMPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Brian Morris, United States District Court Judge *1159Plaintiff Upper Missouri Waterkeeper ("Waterkeeper") moves for summary judgment in its First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 148.) Waterkeeper asserts two causes of action. Waterkeeper first alleges that EPA's approval of Montana's numeric nutrient criteria for nitrogen and phosphorous, contained in the variance, violates 33 U.S.C. § 1313. (Doc. 130 at 17-18.) Waterkeeper next contends that EPA's approval of the variance proves both contrary to the evidence and arbitrary and capricious. Id. at 18-19. Waterkeeper requests that the Court vacate EPA's…
2Cases cited20 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
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Donohoe v. U.S. Forest ServiceDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2022
- Friends of Animals v. HaalandDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2020
- Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. United States Environmental Protection AgencyDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2019
- Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. United States Environmental Protection AgencyDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2020
- Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. United States Environmental Protection AgencyDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2020