Legal Opinion
United States v. Allen
District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
Decided February 4, 2005No. 80-C-133PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CRABB, Chief Judge.
Intervenors, James P. Wachtendonk, et al. (veterans), bring this motion for attorney’s fees on behalf of both the veterans and the respondents, Allen and Van Miller. The matter was originally before the court on a petition brought by the United States to enforce administrative subpoenas issued to respondents by an Environmental Protection Agency Administrative Law Judge. The administrative law judge issued the subpoenas at the request of intervening petitioner, Dow Chemical Company, over the objection of the Office of General Counsel of the Environmental Protection Agency.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- The Dow Chemical Company, Intervening v. Dr. James R. Allen and John Van Miller, and James P. Wachtendonk, InterveningCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- Fisher v. Marubeni Cotton Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
- United States v. FriedmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- In Re Continental Illinois Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1983
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Badman v. StarkDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1991
- National Labor Relations Board v. Cable Car Advertisers, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2004
- Skelton v. General Motors Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1987
- Nalco Chemical Co. v. Hydro Technologies, Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1993
- Etzle v. GlovaDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.