Judge tosses out rules for managing forests
Legal News Center
[##_1L|1154600086.jpg|width="100" height="101" alt=""|_##]A federal district judge in San Francisco has ruled that the US Forest Service violated environmental laws when it promulgated a 2005 regulation governing the management of national forests. On motions for summary judgment in combined lawsuits brought by environmental groups, US District Judge Phyllis Hamilton of the Northern District of California Friday enjoined the Forest Service from enforcing the rule "until it has fully complied" with the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. Hamilton found that the 2005 regulation, which gave national forest managers more discretion in allowing logging, mining and other activities, had been adopted without adequate procedural safeguards, environmental reviews and public comment. Hamilton wrote:
The agency was required to undertake some type of consultation, informal or otherwise, prior to making a conclusive determination that there would be no effect. Given the 2005 Rule's potential indirect effects on listed species, combined with the USDA's lack of documentation in support of their "no effect" determination, the failure to consult and/or prepare any type of biological analysis in conjunction with the 2005 Rule was arbitrary and capricious.
At the same time, Hamilton declined to reinstate a 1982 regulation, as the environmental groups had sought.
Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife, one of the plaintiff groups, praised Hamilton's ruling, saying:
The Bush administration reversed decades of progress in managing national forests, without considering the impacts on wildlife and the environment. The administration also cut the public out of the loop when considering these large-scale changes to how our nation's forests are managed.
US Justice Department officials are considering an appeal.
Related listings
-
Judge dismisses lawsuit against Rumsfeld
Legal News Center 03/30/2007[##_1L|1167504311.jpg|width="170" height="128" alt=""|_##]Former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld cannot be tried on allegations of torture in overseas military prisons, a federal judge said Tuesday in a case he described as "lamentable." U.S. Di...
-
Gonzales aide testifies about firings
Legal News Center 03/29/2007[##_1L|1214636786.jpg|width="140" height="112" alt=""|_##]Eight federal prosecutors were fired last year because they did not sufficiently support President Bush's priorities, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' former chief of staff said today, a sta...
-
Gonzales loses allies in Republican ranks
Legal News Center 03/28/2007Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' allies on Capitol Hill have grown more scarce as he left it largely to aides to carry out President Bush's order to straighten out the story behind the firing of eight federal prosecutors.Senate Republicans leaving ...
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.