The court holds that the U.S. Forest Service's modification of the terms and conditions of grazing permits for the Gila and Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests did not deprive permit holders of procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment. The court first holds that the permit holders have not de...

The court holds that a timber company cannot bring a takings claim against the United States for canceling a timber sales contract in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest in Washington State, but that the company can bring a breach of contract claim under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA). The U...

The court upholds a district court decision finding that an intermunicipal agreement between a town and several villages concerning the disposal of solid waste does not violate the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The agreement required each village to deliver all waste generated within its jurisdictio...

The court affirms a district court dismissal of an environmental group's claim that the U.S. Forest Service violated regulations governing off-road vehicle (ORV) use in the Siskiyou National Forest in Oregon. The court first holds that the Forest Service's ORV monitoring did not violate 36 C.F.R. §...

The court affirms a district court grant of summary judgment to the National Park Service on the grounds that the Park Service's deer management program in Gettysburg National Military Park and Eisenhower National Historic Site does not violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Nat...

The court finds that a U.S. Forest Service letter enforcing a decision to close certain areas of Lolo National Forest to motorized use did not constitute final agency action subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Forest Management Act. The Forest Servic...

The Court holds that three 1995 U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) amendments to the federal grazing regulations neither violate the Taylor Grazing Act nor exceed the Secretary of the Interior's authority under that Act. The Court first holds that the new definition of "grazing privileges" does n...

The court holds that a lower court improperly dismissed a laundry detergent manufacturer's claim that an exclusive franchise agreement between a county and a solid waste handler violated the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The agreement gave the waste handler the exclusive right to collect and process...

The court holds that a local utilities authority was not authorized under the New Jersey Municipal and Counties Utilities Authorities Law (MCUAL) to charge prior users of the authority's waste disposal facilities an environmental investment credit (EIC). The authority imposed the EIC in order to liq...

The court holds that a county in Missouri can regulate the location of solid waste facilities. A development company challenged a county regulation that prohibits the location of a sanitary landfill within one-quarter mile of any occupied dwelling. A trial court denied the company's motion for summa...