Cases filed in the Tenth Circuit Courts
Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Utah Native Plant Society, et al v. United States Forest Service, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 17-4074
Plaintiff - Appellant: UTAH NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY and GRAND CANYON TRUST
Defendant - Appellee: UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE and TOM TIDWELL, in his official capacity as Chief of the U.S. Forest Service
Utah Native Plant Society et al v. United States Forest Service et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2016cv00056
Plaintiff: Utah Native Plant Society and Grand Canyon Trust
Defendant: United States Forest Service and Tom Tidwell
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0551
Rocky Mountain Wild, et al v. Vilsack, et al
as 13-1359
Plaintiff - Appellee: ROCKY MOUNTAIN WILD, a Colorado non-profit corporation and WILDEARTH GUARDIANS, a New Mexico non-profit corporation
Defendant - Appellant: TOM VILSACK, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture, TOM TIDWELL, in his official capacity as the Chief Forester of the U.S. Forest Service, THOMAS MALECEK, in his official capacity as District Ranger for the Rio Grande National Forest and others
Biodiversity Conservation, et al v. Jiron, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 13-1352
Plaintiff - Appellant: BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ALLIANCE, FKA Biodiversity Associates and BRIAN BRADEMEYER
Defendant - Appellee: DANIEL J. JIRON, Regional Forester fpr tje Rocky Mountain Region of the United States Forest Service, TOM TIDWELL, Chief of the United States Forest Service and CRAIG BOBZIEN, Supervisor for the Black Hills National Forest
Defendant-Intervenor - Appellee: LUCAS LENTSCH, Secretary of the South Dakota Department of Agriculture, BLACK HILLS FOREST RESOURCE ASSOCIATION, BLACK HILLS MULTIPLE USE COALITION and others
Rocky Mountain Wild, et al v. Vilsack, et al
as 12-1133
Plaintiff - Appellee: ROCKY MOUNTAIN WILD, a Colorado non-profit corporation and WILDEARTH GUARDIANS, a New Mexico non-profit corporation
Defendant - Appellant: TOM VILSACK, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture, ABIGAIL R. KIMBELL, in her official capacity as the Chief Forrester of the US Forest Service, TOM TIDWELL, in his official capacity as the Chief Forester of the U.S. Forest Service and others
WildEarth Guardians et al v. United States Forest Service et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2011cv03171
Plaintiff: WildEarth Guardians , Powder River Basin Resource Council and Sierra Club
Defendant: United States Forest Service, Tom Tidwell, Maribeth Gustafson and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Peper v. Department of Agriculture, et al
as 11-1237
Plaintiff - Appellant: KENNETH E. PEPER
Defendant - Appellee: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOREST SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TOM TIDWELL, as Chief, in his official capacity and others
Cross Mountain Limited Partnership v. Vilsack et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2009cv01902
Plaintiff: Cross Mountain Limited Partnership
Defendant: Tom Vilsack, United States Department of Agriculture, Tom Tidwell and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0701 Administrative Procedure Act
Type: Other Statutes None
Peper v. Department of Agriculture, Uni, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 08-1131
Plaintiff - Appellant: KENNETH E. PEPER
Defendant - Appellee: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, UNITED STATES, MIKE JOHANNS, Secretary, in his official capacity, FOREST SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and others
Copar Pumice Co., Inc. v. Tidwell, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 07-2211
Plaintiff - Appellant: COPAR PUMICE CO., INC.
Defendant - Appellee: TOM TIDWELL, Chief of the United States Forest Service, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, GILBERT ZEPEDA, Appeal Reviewing Officer, Deputy Regional Forester, United States Forest Service and others

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?