Fund for Animals v. Norton, No. CIV.A.02-2367 EGS.

CourtUnited States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
Writing for the CourtSullivan
Citation323 F.Supp.2d 7
PartiesTHE FUND FOR ANIMALS, et al Plaintiffs, v. Gale NORTON, et al, Defendants. Greater Yellowstone Coalition, et al Plaintiffs, v. Gale Norton, et al, Defendants.
Docket NumberNo. CIV.A.02-2367 EGS.
Decision Date30 June 2004
323 F.Supp.2d 7
THE FUND FOR ANIMALS, et al Plaintiffs,
v.
Gale NORTON, et al, Defendants.
Greater Yellowstone Coalition, et al Plaintiffs,
v.
Gale Norton, et al, Defendants.
No. CIV.A.02-2367 EGS.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
June 30, 2004.

Page 8

Eric Robert Glitzenstein, Howard M. Crystal, Meyer & Glitzenstein, Washington, DC, Douglas L. Honnold, Bozeman, MT, for Plaintiffs.

Lauren Beth Fischer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendants.

William P. Horn, Birch, Horton, Bittner and Cherot, Washington, DC, Susan E. Buxton, Boise, ID, Jay A. Jerde, Lynda Graham Cook, Attorney General's Office, Cheyenne, WY, for Movants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

SULLIVAN, District Judge.


Pending before the Court are Federal Defendants' Conditional Motion for Partial Relief from Judgment, the Fund for Animals Plaintiffs' Motion to Modify Relief, and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition Plaintiffs' Motion for an Injunction.1 Upon careful consideration of the motions, the responses and replies thereto, the entire record herein, as well as the governing statutory and case law, and for the following reasons, it is by the Court hereby ORDERED that the Federal Defendants' Conditional Motion for Partial Relief from Judgment is GRANTED, and the Fund for Animals Plaintiffs' Motion to Modify Relief and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition Plaintiffs' Motion for an Injunction are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling, if appropriate, upon the National Park Service's promulgation of a Rule governing winter use in the Yellowstone Parks.

I. PERTINENT HISTORY

This case originally came before the Court on the Fund for Animals' ("Fund") and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition's ("Yellowstone Coalition") challenge to the National Park Service's ("Service" or "NPS") administrative decision, codified in a 2003 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ("SEIS") and Record of Decision ("2003 ROD"), to allow continued snowmobiling and trail grooming in Yellowstone National Park, Grand Teton National

Page 9

Park, and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway (collectively "Yellowstone" or "Parks"). During the course of this litigation, and a mere six days before the snowmobiling season was scheduled to begin, the NPS issued a Final Rule governing winter use in the Yellowstone Parks. See Winter Use Plan Final Rule, 68 Fed.Reg. 69,268 (Dec. 11, 2003)("2003 Rule"). On December 16, 2003, this Court, finding both Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") and National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") violations, vacated and remanded the 2003 Record of Decision, the 2003 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and the 2003 Final Rule to the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, for further proceedings not inconsistent with the Opinion. Taking notice that the NPS's published 2003 Final Rule stated that, absent promulgation of the new regulations, the existing 2001 regulations would go into effect, the Court further ordered that "the prior January 22, 2001, Final Rule, as modified by the November 18, 2002, Final Rule, shall remain in effect until further Order of the Court." See The Fund for Animals v. Norton 294 F.Supp.2d 92, 115 (D.D.C.2003); see also 2003 Final Rule, 68 Fed.Reg. at 69,269 ("Absent the promulgation of these new regulations, the existing regulations which reduce the numbers of snowmobiles that may be used in the parks during the winter of 2003-2004, but without air and sound emissions requirements, will continue to apply."). Defendants' subsequent Motion for a Stay was denied by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The Fund for Animals v. Norton, 2004 WL 98700 (D.C.Cir. Jan.13, 2004).

After unsuccessfully seeking a stay of this Court's decision in this Circuit, the State of Wyoming and the International Snowmobile Manufacturers Association, both intervenors in the case before this Court, moved for injunctive relief in the U.S. District Court for Wyoming, specifically seeking to enjoin implementation of the 2001 Rule.2 See Int'l Snowmobile Mfrs. Ass'n. v. Norton, 304 F.Supp.2d 1278, 1285 (D.Wyo.2004). The Wyoming court granted the relief sought, ordered that the NPS was "temporarily restrained from enforcing the 2001 Snowcoach Rule," and further ordered the NPS to

promulgate temporary rules for this 2004 snowmobile season that will be fair and equitable to snowmobile owners and users, to the business community, and to the environmental interests, such as the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, by limiting snowmobile use to four-stroke machines, and to all other interests public and private, of which the NPS is aware.

Id. at 1294.

II. ANALYSIS

A. Federal Defendants' Motion for Relief from Judgment

Federal Defendants now seek relief from this Court's Order enjoining the 2003 Rule and implementing the 2001 Rule. They argue that the NPS "is left in the impossible position of having to satisfy two irreconcilable court orders," and aver that "coordinate courts should...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Religious Sisters of Mercy v. Azar, Case No. 3:16-cv-00386
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of North Dakota
    • 19 January 2021
    ...See California ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., 710 F. Supp. 2d 916, 921-23 (N.D. Cal. 2008) ; Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F. Supp. 2d 7, 10-11 (D.D.C. 2004) ; Exxon Corp. v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 594 F. Supp. 84, 89-90 (D. Del. 1984) ; Common Cause v. Jud. Ethics Comm., 473 F. ......
  • Wyoming Lodging v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, No. 04-CV-315-B.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Wyoming
    • 14 October 2005
    ...F.Supp.2d 1 (D.D.C.2005); Int'l Snowmobile Manufacturers Ass'n v. Norton, 340 F.Supp.2d 1249 (D.Wyo.2004); Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C.2004); Int'l Snowmobile Manufacturers Ass'n v. Norton, 304 F.Supp.2d 1278 (D.Wyo.2004); Fund for Animals v. Norton, 294 F.Supp.2d 92 ......
  • Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Kempthorne, Civ. No. 07-2111(EGS).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • 15 September 2008
    ...Yellowstone's winter management began in 1997 and has continued nearly without pause to the present day. See Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C. 2004)("FFA II"); Fund for Animals v. Norton, 294 F.Supp.2d 92 (D.D.C. 2003)("FFA I"); Fund for Animals v. Babb......
  • Cal. ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Nos. C05-03508 EDL
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • 2 December 2008
    ...omitted). In support of their request that the Court stay its injunction in its entirety, Defendants rely on Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C.2004), in which the district court faced a somewhat similar situation. There, the District of Columbia district court vacated an ag......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Religious Sisters of Mercy v. Azar, Case No. 3:16-cv-00386
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of North Dakota
    • 19 January 2021
    ...See California ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., 710 F. Supp. 2d 916, 921-23 (N.D. Cal. 2008) ; Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F. Supp. 2d 7, 10-11 (D.D.C. 2004) ; Exxon Corp. v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 594 F. Supp. 84, 89-90 (D. Del. 1984) ; Common Cause v. Jud. Ethics Comm., 473 F. ......
  • Wyoming Lodging v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, No. 04-CV-315-B.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Wyoming
    • 14 October 2005
    ...F.Supp.2d 1 (D.D.C.2005); Int'l Snowmobile Manufacturers Ass'n v. Norton, 340 F.Supp.2d 1249 (D.Wyo.2004); Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C.2004); Int'l Snowmobile Manufacturers Ass'n v. Norton, 304 F.Supp.2d 1278 (D.Wyo.2004); Fund for Animals v. Norton, 294 F.Supp.2d 92 ......
  • Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Kempthorne, Civ. No. 07-2111(EGS).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Columbia
    • 15 September 2008
    ...Yellowstone's winter management began in 1997 and has continued nearly without pause to the present day. See Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C. 2004)("FFA II"); Fund for Animals v. Norton, 294 F.Supp.2d 92 (D.D.C. 2003)("FFA I"); Fund for Animals v. Babb......
  • Cal. ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Nos. C05-03508 EDL
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • 2 December 2008
    ...omitted). In support of their request that the Court stay its injunction in its entirety, Defendants rely on Fund for Animals v. Norton, 323 F.Supp.2d 7 (D.D.C.2004), in which the district court faced a somewhat similar situation. There, the District of Columbia district court vacated an ag......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT