Legal Opinion
Drake v. Pierce
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided September 12, 1988No. C87-594RPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ROTHSTEIN, Chief Judge.
THIS MATTER comes before the court on cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs move for summary judgment on their remaining Administrative Procedures Act claim (APA) against defendants the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), its Secretary, Samuel R. Pierce (“the Secretary”), and Harold E. Saether, an official with HUD’s Region X (Seattle) Office (referred to collectively as “the federal defendants”). The federal defendants seek judgment in their favor on a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Russello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- National Labor Relations Board v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 23Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Appeal of New Hampshire Department of Employment SecuritySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1996
- Liddy v. CisnerosDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1993