United States v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes

Good Law
841 F.2d 329·1988 WL 19037·18 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20597·1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 2921
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 9, 198887-5197California649 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lovell, J.

The question of first impression here before the court is whether the City of Ran-cho Palos Verdes (hereinafter “City”) is a “person” under the Endangered Species Act (hereinafter “ESA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. 3731. The Court of Appeals interprets de novo statutory provisions of the ESA. Enos v. Marsh, 769 F.2d 1363, 1367 (9th Cir.1985).

By information filed on April 2, 1987, City was charged with the misdemeanor of unlawful taking of an endangered species, the Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly, in violation of Title 16, United States Code, Sections 1538 (a)(1)(B), 1538(g) and 1540(b)(1). The United States District Court for the Central District of California granted City’s motion to dismiss the information concluding that City, a municipal corporation and a political subdivision of the State of California, was not a “person” as defined in the ESA.

In construing a statute in a case of first impression the court must look first to the language of the statute itself and then to the legislative history. Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc., 447 U.S. 102, 108 , 100 S.Ct. 2051, 2056 , 64 L.Ed.2d…

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.