Guindon v. Pritzker

31 F. Supp. 3d 169 (2014)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Guindon v. Pritzker

United States District Court for the District of Columbia
31 F. Supp. 3d 169 (2014)

  • Written by Liz Nakamura, JD

Facts

The Gulf Regional Fisheries Management Council (Council) managed the Gulf of Mexico fishery under the authority of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (defendant). The Council created fishery management plans (FMPs), which included setting annual catch quotas for commercial and recreational fishermen to prevent overfishing. Red snapper was designated as overfished and was subject to a strict quota that was allocated 51-49 between commercial and recreational fishermen. The commercial quota was enforced through strict monitoring and individual vessel quotas. The recreational quota was enforced through fixed recreational fishing seasons and by checking recreational catch totals using dockside intercepts and phone surveys. From 2008 to 2012, recreational fishermen exceeded their red snapper quota. In 2013, the Council proposed increasing the recreational red snapper quota. Subsequently, the Council received landing data indicating that 2013 recreational landings had already exceeded the quota, even with the proposed increase. The 2013 landing data was collected using a more comprehensive sampling method than in prior years. Regardless, NMFS reopened the recreational red snapper season in the fall, thereby allowing additional recreational landings above the annual quota. Keith Guindon (plaintiff), a commercial fisherman, challenged the NMFS’s red snapper recreational fishing regulations, arguing that the regulations violated the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson–Stevens Act) by failing to prevent retention of fish caught over the recreational quota. NMFS countered, arguing that the new sampling methodology used in 2013 indicated that the quota should have been set higher and that it was inappropriate to punish recreational fishermen for violating artificially low quotas.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rothstein, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 745,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership