Western Watersheds Project v. Matejko
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
468 F.3d 1099 (2006)
- Written by Oni Harton, JD
Facts
Western Watersheds Project (Western Watersheds) (plaintiff) sued Matejko (BLM) (defendant), alleging that the BLM violated Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by failing to consult with the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) regarding hundreds of river and stream diversions on public lands. The trial court found that the BLM had the discretion to regulate the diversions, that BLM’s failure to exercise that discretion constituted an agency action for purposes of Section 7(a)(2), and that the water diversions could jeopardize threatened species of fish. The trial court concluded that BLM had a duty to consult and ruled for Western Watersheds. The BLM appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (King, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.