616 F. Supp. 32 - Enos v. Marsh’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently November 2015
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 16 U.S.C. § 1451 (Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program Act) · 16 U.S.C. § 1456 · 16 U.S.C. § 1531 (§ 2 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 1532 (§ 3 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 1533 (§ 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 1536 (§ 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 470 (National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act of 2000) · 16 U.S.C. § 470F
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo · Kleppe v. Sierra Club · Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission v. National Football League
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, consultation would have to be completed within 90 days or such other time as it is mutually agreeable to the Secretary and the Federal Agency. Second, after the conclusion of consultation the Secretary is required to provide the Federal Agency a written statement detailing whether the agency’s actions are in violation of section 7 and outline any reasonable and prudent alternatives to the action. Third, a biological assessment shall be conducted for the purpose of identifying the presence of any proposed or listed species which might be affected by projects where no contracts for actual construction have been entered into and no construction has begun before the date of enactment of this bill and where the Secretary has advised that such species may be present. Fourth, after the initiation of consultation, the Federal Agency is prohibited from making any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources which has the effect of foreclosing the formulation of implementation of reasonable and prudent alternatives to the proposed action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“highly speculative nature of the potential effects and ability of state and local authorities to limit ... such effects ... render the EIS 'minimally acceptable.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Enos v. Marsh“[g]rowth can be viewed as adverse or beneficial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Enos v. Marsh
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.