Cases filed in the Ninth Circuit Courts
Cases 1 - 10 of 133
Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Higgins, et al.
as 24-1500
Plaintiff: ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES
Defendant: JEANNE HIGGINS, Idaho Panhandle National Forest Supervisor, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and UNITED STATES FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Interior
Central Oregon Wild Horse Coalition, et al. v. Vilsack, et al.
as 23-4260
Plaintiff / Appellant: CENTRAL OREGON WILD HORSE COALITION, a non-profit organization, GAYLE HUNT, an individual and MELINDA KESTLER, an individual
Defendant / Appellee: TOM VILSACK, in his official capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, RANDY MOORE, Chief of the U.S. Forest Service, in his official capacity, GLENN CASAMASSA, Regional Forester, Pacific Northwest Region of the U.S. Forest Service, in his official capacity and others
Inside Passage Electric Cooperative et al v. U.S. Department of Agriculture et al
as 3:2023cv00204
Plaintiff: Inside Passage Electric Cooperative and Alaska Power Association
Defendant: U.S. Department of Agriculture and Thomas Vilsack
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Perkins v. U.S. Department of Agriculture et al
as 3:2023cv08113
Plaintiff: Silkie Perkins
Defendant: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Thomas Vilsack, U.S. Forest Service and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Scott v. U.S. Department of Agriculture et al
as 2:2023cv00697
Plaintiff: Gene Edward Scott, II
Defendant: U.S. Department of Agriculture and Unknown Parties
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Marquis v. Uecker et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2023cv00015
Plaintiff: Cory Shannon Marquis
Defendant: John Uecker, Agricultural Marketing Service, Fair Trade Practices Program and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Injunctive & Declaratory Relief
Friends of the Clearwater v. Cheryl Probert, et al
as 23-35070
Plaintiff / Appellee: FRIENDS OF THE CLEARWATER, a non-profit corporation
Defendant / Appellant: CHERYL F. PROBERT, in her official capacity as Forest Supervisor for the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests and U.S. FOREST SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant: IDAHO RECREATION COUNCIL, INC., PUBLIC LAND ACCESS YEAR-ROUND and IDAHO STATE ATV ASSOCIATION
Community Action Resources Enterprises, Inc., et al v. Thomas Vilsack, et al
as 22-35539
Plaintiff / Appellant: COMMUNITY ACTION RESOURCES ENTERPRISES, INC., an Oregon not-for-profit organization
Plaintiff: LISA MCFALLS, MICHAEL MCFALLS and FRED WOODRING
Defendant / Appellee: THOMAS J. VILSACK, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, JUSTIN MAXSON, Deputy Undersecretary for Rural Development, JOAQUIN ALTORO, Administrator of Rural Housing Service 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
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.


Why Is My Information Online?