United States v. 2012-08-28 | 10-17896 | THE SAVE THE PEAKS COALTION V. USFS | precedential | opinion |

10-17896Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit28 de ago. de 2012

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
 THE SAVE THE PEAKS COALITION;
KRISTIN HUISINGA; CLAYSON
BENALLY; SYLVAN GREY; DON
FANNING; JENEDA BENALLY;
FREDERICA HALL; BERTA BENALLY; No. 10-17896
RACHEL TSO; LISA TSO, D.C. No.
Plaintiffs-Appellants, 3:09-cv-08163-
v. MHM  District of Arizona, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE; Phoenix JOSEPH P. STRINGER, Acting Forest
Supervisor for the Coconino ORDER
National Forest,
Defendants-Appellees,
ARIZONA SNOWBOWL RESORT LP,
Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee. 
Filed August 28, 2012
Before: J. Clifford Wallace, John T. Noonan, and
Milan D. Smith, Jr., Circuit Judges.
Order;
Dissent by Judge Wallace
10569

-- 1 of 2 --

ORDER
Our order filed on June 21, 2012 (ECF No. 77) is hereby
amended. All portions of the order, except the portion deny-
ing Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee Arizona Snowbowl Resort
Limited Partnership’s (Snowbowl) motion for attorney’s fees,
are withdrawn, Snowbowl’s motion for costs is denied, and
our referral of the order to the Appellate Commissioner is
withdrawn.
In light of these amendments, Attorney Plain-
tiffs’/Appellants Save the Peaks Coalition’s July 5, 2012 Peti-
tion for Rehearing En Banc is denied, as moot.
WALLACE, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. I would impose sanctions on Shanker
for “grossly abus[ing] the judicial process by strategically
holding back claims that could have, and should have, been
asserted in the first lawsuit (and would have been decided ear-
lier but for counsel’s procedural errors in raising those
claims).” Save the Peaks Coal. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 669 F.3d
1025, 1028 (9th Cir. 2012).
10570 SAVE THE PEAKS COALITION v. USFS

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.