Day: August 21, 2013

Categories
Documents Legal, Laws, and Regs

Another excellent court resource: Justia

I was reminded of another valuable resource for accessing court documents: Justia. I’ve used the site many a time, and it’s helped me discover cases related to one entity or another more than once.

You can search for a court case for free at Justia, and once you’ve found the case, you can then directly access the PACER court documents from the returned result. Using Justia you can save on the dime-a-page query forms that PACER provides.

As an example, when I searched on “Front Range Equine Rescue” and New Mexico, I found the listing for the court case I’m currently following related to horse meat plants and USDA inspections that has been on fire with activity today. Yes, I still need to use PACER to access the docket and court cases, but I’ve saved from a dime to a dollar just finding the case.

Hey, every penny counts.

Categories
Documents Legal, Laws, and Regs

Front Range Equine Rescue vs. USDA on allowing horse slaughter: Update

This court case has been on fire today. Several new filings, all related to the recent motion by the plaintiffs to re-word the TRO (Temporary Restraining Order) and bond amount. The judge gave the defendant USDA and interveners until noon today to respond.

I’m re-doing the docket sheet for the case, and will post it and links to all downloaded court documents later. I’m also writing a follow up article on the case at Burningbird web site. For now, though: links to today’s filings.

Motion against filed by Responsible Transportation

Motion against filed by International Equine Business Association and a pack of other people and groups.

Declaration by Ricardo De Los Santos

Motion against by the USDA

Motion against filed by Valley Meat Company et al

Memo in support by the State of New Mexico

There are associated attachments, too, but this should be enough to keep folks busy.

Categories
Legal, Laws, and Regs

Dry wit among the legalese

I have mentioned, at least once or twice, that legal documents aren’t as dry and obtuse as many people think they are. Indeed, some court decisions display a dry wit that can put any nonfiction best seller to shame.

Take a recent decision by the DC Appeals court in the case Conservation Force, Inc. et al v. Sally Jewel et al. A group of people, wanting to enable rich sportsmen to bring home their trophy kills of the straight-horned markhor, sued the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) because it did not respond in a timely manner to a petition to reclassify the endangered markhor as threatened (allowing said rich sportsmen to bring home their trophies, among other things). The court dismissed the claim because it was time-barred. The petitioners promptly filed an appeal.

The DC Appeals court dismissed the complaint because it’s no longer moot—while the case was ongoing, FWS did reclassify the markhor as threatened rather than endangered, so the original claims of injury are no longer relevant.

This case is just one of many challenging endangered status for any number of animals, in this country and out, and as such is of concern to those of us who see such actions as part of an overall campaign to weaken the Endangered Species Act. But it is the wording of the decision that really makes it stand out.

I don’t want to give away the fun bits. Download the decision by Chief Judge Garland, and read at least the first page of the decision (page 2 in the document). Pay particular attention to the first footnote.

And if you’re concerned about the Endangered Species Act, take the time to read the rest of the document.

(h/t to David Ingram)