Natural Res. Defense Council v. Salazar
Citation | 710 F.3d 874 |
Decision Date | 05 March 2013 |
Docket Number | No. 09–17661.,09–17661. |
Parties | NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL; California Trout; San Francisco Baykeeper; Friends of the River; the Bay Institute, all non-profit organizations, Plaintiffs–Appellants, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Plaintiff in Related Case, v. Kenneth Lee SALAZAR, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Interior; Dan Ashe, in his official capacity as Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Michael L. Connor, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; Anderson–Cottonwood Irrigation District; Pacific Realty Associates, LP; Reclamation District 1004; Beverly F. Andreotti; Banta–Carbona Irrigation District; Patterson Irrigation District; West Side Irrigation District; Byron Bethany Irrigation District; Carter Mutual Water Company; Howald Farms, Inc.; Maxwell Irrigation District; Meridian Farms Water Company; Oji Brothers Farms, Inc.; Henry D. Richter; Sutter Mutual Water Co.; Tisdale Irrigation and Drainage Company; Windswept Land and Livestock Company; City Of Redding; Coelho Family Trust; Eagle Field Water District; Mercy Springs Water District; Oro Loma Water District; Conaway Preservation Group; Del Puerto Water District; West Stanislaus Irrigation District; Fresno Slough Water District; James Irrigation District; Tranquillity Irrigation District; Christo D. Bardis; Abdul Rauf; Tahmina Rauf; Sacramento River Ranch, LLC; Fred Tenhunfeld; Family Farm Alliance, Defendants–Appellees, San Luis & Delta–Mendota Water Authority; Westlands Water District; California Farm Bureau Federation; State Water Contractors; California Department of Water Resources; Glenn–Colusa Irrigation District; Natomas Central Mutual Water Company; Pelger Mutual Water Company; Pleasant Grove–Verona Mutual Water Company; Reclamation District 108; River Garden Farms Company; Princeton–Codora–Glenn Irrigation District; Provident Irrigation District; Kern County Water Agency, Defendant–Intervenors–Appellees. |
Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Hamilton Candee, Rachel Justine Zwillinger, Barbara Jane Chisholm, Altshuler Berzon LLP, Douglas Andrew Obegi, Katherine S. Poole, Senior, Natural Resources Defense Council, Trent Orr, Earthjustice, San Francisco, CA, Michael R. Sherwood, Earthjustice, Oakland, CA, for Plaintiffs–Appellants.
James Maysonett, Trial, Robert Harris Oakley, Jean Eva Williams, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice,...
To continue reading
Request your trial9 cases
-
Pac. Coast Fed'n of Fishermen's Ass'ns v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior
...¶ 33b. 14. Although this decision was affirmed sub nomine, 686 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir.2012), rehearing en banc was granted on March 5, 2013, 710 F.3d 874, 2013 WL 794343. 15. It is worth noting that this standing impediment did not exist with respect to other types of CVP contracts that did not......
-
Jenkins v. Biter, LA CV 13-02724 VBF (RZ)
...... pretrial investigation and put on an adequate defense, id. at 6 ¶ 7(d); (4B) his Page 2 appellate attorney ......
-
Brown v. Arnold
...... the cost, anxiety, and inconvenience of criminal defense are not the kind of special circumstances or irreparable ......
-
Green v. BPH Comm'rs
...with fully unexhausted petitions have some of the same options. See Mena v. Long, 813 F.3d 907, 912 (9th Cir. 2016); Henderson, 710 F.3d at 874. Accordingly, the court presents petitioner with the following options: Option 1: If petitioner contends that he has in fact exhausted his state co......
Request a trial to view additional results