From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fund for Animals v. Babbitt

United States District Court, D. Columbia
May 5, 1997
967 F. Supp. 6 (D.D.C. 1997)

Summary

concluding Service failed to meet obligation under the ESA to incorporate sufficient objective, measurable delisting criteria in Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan

Summary of this case from Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Haaland

Opinion

Civil Nos. 94-1021 (PLF), 94-1106 (PLF).

May 5, 1997.

Eric Robert Glitzenstein, Meyer Glitzenstein, Washington, DC, for Fund for Animals.

Howard I. Fox, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, Washington, DC, for National Audubon Society.

Joseph R. Perella, Environment Natural Resources Div., Washington, DC, for Defendants.


ORDER


On consideration of the parties' joint motion for approval of their settlement agreement and limited relief under Rule 60(b), and in accordance with this Court's January 29, 1997, opinion, it is hereby ordered that the parties' settlement agreement is approved and it is further ordered that the Court's September 29, 1995, Opinion is hereby amended as follows:

(1) The clause in the last sentence of footnote 7, which reads, "and because under the statute that factor alone may have been sufficient to justify listing the bear, 50 C.F.R. § 424.11(c)" is hereby vacated; and

(2) The words "past" and "historic" in the last sentence of footnote 7 are hereby vacated.

The clerk is directed to submit a copy of the amended opinion with the vacated portions deleted to West's Reporting Service for publication.

This case is hereby dismissed, except with regard to any claim for attorneys fees' and costs, and except that any party may move to enforce any aspect of the Court's September 29, 1995, order as amended, or to enforce the settlement agreement filed with the Court along with the parties' joint Rule 60(b) motion;

Any claim for attorneys' fees and costs will be resolved in accordance with ¶ 8 of the parties' settlement agreement.


Summaries of

Fund for Animals v. Babbitt

United States District Court, D. Columbia
May 5, 1997
967 F. Supp. 6 (D.D.C. 1997)

concluding Service failed to meet obligation under the ESA to incorporate sufficient objective, measurable delisting criteria in Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan

Summary of this case from Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Haaland

recognizing that the Service is entitled to "flexibility as it implements recovery plan," because "[b]y the time an exhaustively detailed recovery plan is completed and ready for publication, science or circumstances could have changed and the plan might no longer be suitable"

Summary of this case from Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Bernhardt
Case details for

Fund for Animals v. Babbitt

Case Details

Full title:The FUND FOR ANIMALS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Bruce BABBITT, Secretary of…

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: May 5, 1997

Citations

967 F. Supp. 6 (D.D.C. 1997)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. McHugh

The standard set forth in Rule 56(c), therefore, does not apply because of the limited role of a court in…

Wilhelmus v. Geren

The standard set forth in Rule 56(c), therefore, does not apply because of the limited role of a court in…