Cases 41 - 50 of 442
Oregon Wild et al v. United States Forest Service et al
as 1:2022cv01007
Plaintiff:
Oregon Wild and WildEarth Guardians
Defendant:
United States Forest Service, Michael Ramsey, Jeannette Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Center for Biological Diversity, et al v. Haaland, et al
as 22-8043
Petitioner:
WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT, ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES and YELLOWSTONE TO UINTAS CONNECTION
Petitioner / Appellant:
SIERRA CLUB and CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
Respondent / Appellee:
DEBRA A. HAALAND, in her official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE and UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Intervenor Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF WYOMING, UPPER GREEN RIVER CATTLE ASSOCIATION, SOMMERS RANCH, LLC and others
Native Ecosystems Council, et al v. Keith Lannom, et al
as 22-35496
Plaintiff / Appellee:
NATIVE ECOSYSTEMS COUNCIL and ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES
Defendant / Appellant:
KEITH LANNOM, U.S. Forest Service Deputy Regional Forester and U.S. FOREST SERVICE
Greater Hells Canyon Council et al v. Wilkes et al
as 2:2022cv00859
Plaintiff:
Greater Hells Canyon Council, Oregon Wild, Central Oregon LandWatch and others
Defendant:
Homer Wilkes, Glenn Casamassa and United States Forest Service
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Western Watersheds Project, et al v. Haaland, et al
as 22-8031
Petitioner / Appellant:
WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT, ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES and YELLOWSTONE TO UINTAS CONNECTION
Petitioner:
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY and SIERRA CLUB
Respondent / Appellee:
DEBRA A. HAALAND, in her official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE and UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Intervenor Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF WYOMING, UPPER GREEN RIVER CATTLE ASSOCIATION, SOMMERS RANCH, LLC and others
Friends of the Clearwater, et al v. Carl Petrick, et al
as 22-35421
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FRIENDS OF THE CLEARWATER and ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES
Defendant / Appellee:
CARL PETRICK, n his official capacity as Forest Supervisor of the Idaho Panhandle National Forests, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Interior
Intervenor Defendant / Appellee:
STIMSON LUMBER COMPANY
Swan View Coalition et al v. Haaland et al
as 9:2022cv00096
Plaintiff:
Swan View Coalition and Friends of the Wild Swan
Defendant:
Debra Haaland, Martha Williams and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Cause Of Action: 16 U.S.C. § 1538 Endangered Species Act
Cascadia Wildlands et al v. Adcock et al
as 6:2022cv00767
Plaintiff:
Cascadia Wildlands and Oregon Wild
Defendant:
Cheryl Adcock, Paul Tigan and United States Bureau of Land Management
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
Friends of the Clearwater, et al v. Stimson Lumber Company, et al
as 22-35382
Plaintiff / Appellee:
FRIENDS OF THE CLEARWATER and ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES
Defendant:
CARL PETRICK, n his official capacity as Forest Supervisor of the Idaho Panhandle National Forests, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Interior
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant:
STIMSON LUMBER COMPANY
Friends of the Clearwater, et al v. Carl Petrick, et al
as 22-35381
Plaintiff / Appellee:
FRIENDS OF THE CLEARWATER and ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES
Defendant / Appellant:
CARL PETRICK, n his official capacity as Forest Supervisor of the Idaho Panhandle National Forests, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Interior
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant:
STIMSON LUMBER COMPANY
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.
