Brown

Brown v. Ruckelshaus

Good Law
364 F. Supp. 258·3 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20834·5 ERC (BNA) 1803·5 ERC 1803·1973 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11996
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 7, 197373-154-AAH, 73-736-AAHCalifornia5,073 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hauk, J.

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF GEORGE E. BROWN JR.’S AND CITY OF LOS ANGELES’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANT WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

These two matters, arising upon virtually the same factual allegations and determinable by the same legal and judi cial considerations, were argued and are now being decided as consolidated cases.

On January 26, 1973, Congressman George E. Brown, Jr. filed a complaint on behalf of himself and all other California citizens and residents against William D. Ruckelshaus, the former Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, in connection with the allotment procedure of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Pub.L. 92-500 (Oct. 18, 1972) 86 Stat. 816 [hereinafter cited as the Act]. The City of Los Angeles followed suit on April 4, 1973, against the same defendant.

These actions are part of a series of substantially similar lawsuits that have been filed against the EPA across the United States. In turn this collection is one corner of the well-known Presidential impoundment issue in which over $13 billion are presently frozen.

The facts are not in dispute. Congress…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.