Gescheidt

Gescheidt v. Haaland

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 20234:21-cv-04734California10,300 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JACK GESCHEIDT, et al., Case No. 21-cv-04734-HSG

Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

v. JUDGMENT AND DENYING

PLAINTIFFS’ CROSS-MOTION FOR

DEB HAALAND, et al., SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants. Re: Dkt. Nos. 56,

12 Pending before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Dkt. Nos. 56, 57. The Court held a hearing on the motions. For the reasons detailed below, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and DENIES Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. I. BACKGROUND The parties are familiar with the facts of this case, and they are largely undisputed. The Court therefore only briefly summarizes the facts as relevant to the cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs filed this action against the National Park Service (“Park Service” or “NPS”)1 in 2021 to protect the tule elk population that lives in the Tomales Point…

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.