McFarland White Ranch v. SCHAFER et al
| McFarland White Ranch |
| ED SCHAFER, Department of Agriculture, Gail Kimbell, Tom Tidwell, Lesley Thompson and Douglas Dodge |
| 1:2008cv00077 |
| June 4, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Montana |
| Environmental Matters Office |
| WHEATLAND |
| Richard F. Cebull |
| Carolyn S Ostby |
| None |
| U.S. Government Defendant |
| 28:2201 Declaratory Judgement |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
36
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 20 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by McFarland White Ranch, 25 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by ED SCHAFER, Lesley Thompson, Department of Agriculture, Tom Tidwell, Gail Kimbell, Douglas Dodge, 31 Findings and Recommendations,,. Signed by Judge Richard F. Cebull on 5/15/2009. (TMD, )
|
|
Filing
31
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment ; Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment filed by McFarland White Ranch and 25 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by ED SCHAFER, Lesley Thompson, Department of Agric ulture, Tom Tidwell, Gail Kimbell, Douglas Dodge. IT IS RECOMMENDED that McFarland White Ranch's Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED and that the Forest Service's Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED. Objections to F&R are due by 3/27/2009. Signed by Magistrate Carolyn S Ostby on 3/10/2009. (POC, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Montana District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
