American Bottom Conservancy v. United States Army Corps of Engineers et al
| American Bottom Conservancy |
| United States Army Corps of Engineers, Thomas E. O'Hara and Waste Management of Illinois |
| 3:2009cv00603 |
| August 7, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| East St. Louis Office |
| St. Clair |
| G. Patrick Murphy |
| Clifford J. Proud |
| Environmental Matters |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 704 Labor Litigation |
| None |
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
88
ORDER granting 38 , 35 Motions for Summary Judgment; denying 30 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 9/27/2013. (ktc)
|
|
Filing
79
ORDER granting 78 Motion for Taxation of Costs of Appeal brought by Plaintiff American Bottom Conservancy; see attached order for details. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 11/16/2011. (jhs)
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER GRANTING 38 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Waste Management of Illinois; DENYING as moot 30 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by American Bottom Conservancy, 35 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by United States Army Corps of Engineers and Thomas E. O'Hara, and 37 MOTION to Strike filed by United States Army Corps of Engineers and Thomas E. O'Hara; and DISMISSING case without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 9/30/2010. (ssd)
|
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 Illinois Southern 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.
