Appeals court sides with Alaska on roadless rule
Attorneys News
A divided federal appeals court panel on Wednesday sided with the state of Alaska in reversing a decision that reinstated prohibitions on road-building and the harvesting of timber in the nation's largest national forest.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, found that the U.S. Department of Agriculture had articulated "a number of legitimate grounds" in a 2003 decision to temporarily exempt the Tongass National Forest in southeast Alaska from the Roadless Rule, which contains the prohibitions.
A lower court judge, in 2011, had found the decision to be arbitrary and capricious.
The appeals court panel sent the matter back to the district court to determine whether additional environmental review is required. Ninth Circuit Court Judge M. Margaret McKeown dissented, saying the justification for the overturning the lower court's decision was missing.
Related listings
-
Levin & Curlett LLC
Attorneys News 03/27/2014New York - Baltimore - Washington, D.C. White Collar Criminal Defense Levin & Curlett LLC was formed by former prosecutors who created a small, high quality litigation boutique. Levin & Curlett LLC has extensive experience in all facets of cr...
-
AB & Co IP Services - Sierra Leone Intellectual Property Lawyers
Attorneys News 03/27/2014The Gambia Intellectual Property Lawyers Trademark, Patent & Intellectual Property Rights AB & Co is a boutique trademark agency specialising exclusively in the protection of intellectual property rights for our clients in Sierra Leone and Th...
-
The Law Offices of Place and Hanley, LLC
Attorneys News 03/21/2014Securities Arbitration Lawyers Florida The Law Offices of Place & Hanley, LLC is a nationally recognized securities and commodities arbitration law firm which represents investors nationwide. At Place & Hanley we represent investors in claims...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.