Seattle Audubon Society v. John L. Evans, in His Official Capacity as Chief, U.S. Forest Service, Seattle Audubon Society v. United States Forest Service, and Washington Contract Loggers Association, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees. Seattle Audubon Society v. John L. Evans, in His Official Capacity as Chief, U.S. Forest Service, and Washington Contract Loggers Association, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants. Portland Audubon Society v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., in His Official Capacity as Secretary of Interior, and Northwest Forest Resource Council, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees. (Two Cases)

Good Law
952 F.2d 297
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 23, 199191-35529California4,737 words

Opinion

Opinion

952 F.2d 297 22 Envtl. L. Rep. 20 ,372 SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. John L. EVANS, in his official capacity as Chief, U.S. Forest Service, et al., Defendants-Appellees. SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, Defendant-Appellant, and Washington Contract Loggers Association, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees. SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John L. EVANS, in his official capacity as Chief, U.S. Forest Service, Defendant, and Washington Contract Loggers Association, et al., Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants. PORTLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Manuel LUJAN, Jr., in his official capacity as Secretary of Interior, Defendant-Appellee, and Northwest Forest Resource Council, et al., Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees. (Two Cases) Nos. 91-35528, 91-35529, 91-35563, 91-35782, 91-35802 and 91-35992. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 28, 1991. Decided Dec. 23, 1991. Michael D. Axline, Western Environmental Law Clinic, Eugene, Oregon and Victor M. Sher, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, Seattle, Wash., for Seattle Audubon Society, et al. Anne S. Almy,…

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.