Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
632 F.3d 1127 (2011)
- Written by Denise McGimsey, JD
Facts
In 2007, a wildfire burned 27,000 acres in the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest (Beaverhead). In 2009, the U.S. Forest Service (defendant) proposed a project to allow logging on 1,652 acres of the burned land. The purpose was to clear dead and dying trees and prevent the spread of dwarf mistletoe. The acting forest supervisor at Beaverhead asked the Forest Service to issue an Emergency Situation Determination (ESD), which would permit the project to commence immediately, bypassing the administrative appeals process. The chief forester issued an ESD on the grounds that delays would cost the government up to $16,000 and would increase the possibility of receiving no bids for the work, at a cost of up to $70,000 more. In addition, delays would impair the Forest Service’s ability to control dwarf mistletoe. Finally, the chief forester reasoned that the project would add 18 to 26 temporary jobs to the local economy. After the winning bid was chosen, Alliance for the Wild Rockies (AWR) (plaintiff) sued for a preliminary injunction, alleging violations of the Appeals Reform Act (ARA) and other federal statutes. The district court denied the injunction. AWR appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fletcher, J.)
Concurrence (Mosman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.