From our private database of 35,400+ case briefs...
Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska v. Ray
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
621 F.2d 269 (1980)
Facts
In 1975, Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) began planning the construction of a transmission line from Raun, Iowa, to Hoskins, Nebraska. The proposed line was to cross the Missouri River and run through the Winnebago Indian Reservation. In 1977, NPPD informed the Winnebago Tribe (the tribe) (plaintiff) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs of its intent. NPPD applied to the Army Corps of Engineers (the corps) (defendant) for a permit to cross the Missouri River. The corps had jurisdiction over areas in or affecting navigable waters. The corps prepared an environmental-impact assessment on the impact of the portion of the line that crossed the Missouri River. The assessment concluded that an environmental-impact statement (EIS) was not required because the project posed no significant environmental risks. The assessment, however, did not mention any possible adverse side effects on bald eagles, which were a protected species. In 1979, the tribe filed suit against the corps and alleged that they failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and sought to enjoin construction. The trial court ruled that the assessment was proper because the scope of the permit was limited to the area assessed and the federal government was not funding the project. The tribe appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bright, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 617,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,400 briefs, keyed to 984 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.
