Legal Opinion

Stone v. United States Forest Service

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 3, 2006No. 04-56009; D.C. No. CV-01-00267-VAPPublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Jon Stone appeals the district court’s judgment against him on his claim under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). He argues that the United States Forest Service improperly cancelled his grazing permit because the agency failed to give him notice and an opportunity to demonstrate or achieve compliance. See 5 U.S.C. § 558(c). The APA’s procedural protections do not apply, however, “in cases of willfulness.” Id. Because the agency found Stone’s conduct to be willful, and that finding was not arbitrary and capricious, we affirm.

We review the decision below with “no particular…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. U.S. Forest ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  2. POTATO SALES COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, RespondentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
  3. Anchustegui v. Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
  4. Holland Livestock Ranch v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  5. Great Western Bank v. Office Of Thrift SupervisionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API