Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Summers v. Earth Island Institute

United States Supreme Court
555 U.S. 488 (2009)


Facts

The Forest Service Decisionmaking and Appeals Reform Act (Act) required the United States Forest Service (USFS) (defendant) to establish a notice, comment, and appeal process for proposed USFS actions implementing certain land and resource management plans. USFS later promulgated a regulation that exempted small fire-rehabilitation and timber-salvage projects from the notice, comment, and appeal process that the agency used for more significant land management decisions. In 2002, a fire burned a significant portion of the Sequoia National Forest. USFS later issued a decision memo approving the Burnt Ridge Project, a salvage sale of timber on 238 acres damaged by the fire. Based on its categorical exclusion of salvage sales of less than 250 acres, USFS did not provide any notice, period for public comment, or appeals process. A group of organizations dedicated to protecting the environment (plaintiffs) challenged USFS’s failure to apply the Act’s requirements to the Burnt Ridge Project. A federal district court granted a preliminary injunction against the salvage-timber sale, and the parties settled their dispute over the Burnt Ridge Project. The plaintiffs then sought to prevent USFS from again enforcing its regulation excepting certain projects from the Act’s procedural requirements. The district court adjudicated the merits of the plaintiffs’ challenge, and the court of appeals affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari on the issue of standing.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Scalia, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Kennedy, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Stevens, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.