Thomas v. Peterson
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
753 F.2d 754, 15 ELR 20225 (1985)
- Written by Melanie Moultry, JD
Facts
Harold Thomas and other landowners, ranchers, miners, and conservation and recreation organizations (plaintiffs) filed suit in federal court against R. Max Peterson, in his official capacity as Chief Forester of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and others (defendants) to enjoin the construction of a gravel road to be used for harvesting and selling timber in the “Jersey Jack” area of the Nez Perce National Forest in Idaho. Plaintiffs claimed defendants improperly approved the road and timber sales without first preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Plaintiffs also alleged that USFS failed to consider what impact the construction and timber harvesting protection would have on the Rocky Mountain Gray Wolf pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants. Plaintiffs appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sneed, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.
