873 F. Supp. 455 - Ayers v. Espy’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 16 U.S.C. § 1600 (Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974) · 16 U.S.C. § 1604 · 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 4321 (§ 2 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (§ 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council · McKart v. United States · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Plaintiffs next contend that the government violated NFMA’s requirement that clearcutting be used only where it is the “optimum” method and shelterwood cutting only where .it is determined to be “appropriate” to .meet the objectives and requirements of the relevant land manage ment plan. See 16 U.S.C. 1604(g)(3)(F). The government argues that no violation of NFMA has occurred because its certified silviculturist found cleareutting to be the “optimal” harvesting methods for units C, CC, and EE and shelterwood cutting “appropriate” for the remaining cuts. I acknowledge the Forest Service’s presumed expertise in deciding this issue. Id. [Sierra Club v. Espy, 822 F. Supp. 356 ] at 367 [E.D.Tex. (1993)]. The government’s argument misses the mark because, yet again, it failed to give meaningful consideration to all feasible and reasonable alternatives. While the Forest Service may ultimately reach this same conclusion, it must comply with NEPA’s' procedural requirements in doing so. Consequently, in considering all reasonable alternatives on remand, this question must be revisited.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(i) for clearcutting, it is determined to be the optimum method, and for other such cuts it is determined to be appropriate, to meet the objectives and requirements of the relevant land management plan;”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.