U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1984

California v. Watt

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided March 28, 1984

729 F.2d 614 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Theodora Berger, Deputy Atty. Gen., Los Angeles, Cal., for State of Cal., Donatas Januta, San Francisco, Cal., argued, for Coastal Counties and Cities; Irwin D. Karp, Januta & Karp, San Francisco, Cal., on brief., Greer Knopf, Deputy County Counsel, San Diego, Cal., for San Diego County., Trent W. Orr, Natural Resources Defense Council, San Francisco, Cal., argued, for Natural Resources Defense Counsel; Sarah Chasis, Natural Resources Defense Council, New York City, Julie E. McDonald, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, San Francisco, Cal., on brief., E. Edward Bruce, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., for Watt, Western Oil & Gas Ass’n et al., Peter R. Steenland, Jr., Atty., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D.C., for U.S., H. Bartow Farr, III, Joseph N. Onek, Peter E. Scheer, Onek, Klein & Farr, Washington, D.C., for amicus curiae Coastal States Organization.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

State of California, Appellees/cross-Appellants v. James G. Watt, Appellants/cross-Appellees (9th Cir. 1984)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

All parties to this action agree that the opinion of the Supreme Court in Secretary of the Interior v. California, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 656, 78 L.Ed.2d 496 (1984), resolved all outstanding issues in this case. All agree that this ease should be remanded to the district court with instructions to vacate the injunction and dismiss the cause of action. It is so ordered.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.