National Trust for Historic Preservation et al v. Suazo et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|July 17, 2015
ORDER and INJUNCTION: By September 30, 2017, BLM shall complete its reconsideration of the portions of the ROD, RMP, and Final EIS that the Court found deficient in its previous order (Doc. 43 ). Within 60 days of this order, BLM shall implement the interim measures that Ronald Tipton proposed in his affidavit (Doc. 55-1). These measures shall include prohibiting recreational target shooting within the area identified in the affidavit and the accompanying map (Doc. 55-2). The Clerk shall enter a final judgment in this case. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 7/17/15. (SJF)
|June 9, 2015
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 48 Motion for Permanent Injunction. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 6/9/2015.(DGC, nvo)
|March 27, 2015
ORDER granting 32 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment as to their claims that Defendants violated FLPMA and NEPA; and granting 35 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs' claims that Defendants violated the AP A standing alone. The Court vacates the portions of the ROD, RMP, and Final EIS that permit recreational target shooting throughout the Monument and remands to BLM for reconsideration of that decision in light of the shortcomings identified in th is order. The Court also requires BLM to ensure that the Final EIS's analysis of mitigation measures and cumulative impacts be consistent with this order. The Clerk is directed to terminate this action. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 3/27/15.(LSP)
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.
Why Is My Information Online?