![]() ![]() Citizen suits, such as Headwaters' challenge to the Forest Service's decision-making process under the National Environmental Policy Act, National Forest Management Act, and the Administrative Procedures Act, usually involve disputes over public rights or public goods that affect communities as a whole. In so doing, the court missed an opportunity to identify a public rights exception in the determination of adequate representation under preclusion doctrine based on the significant difference between conventional cases that focus on individual interests and citizen suits that consider effects on public interests. The Ninth Circuit interpreted Supreme Court precedent broadly to reject preclusion by virtual representation, furthering the implicit policy of allowing every person to have a "day in court." The court supported its policy-based decision with a seemingly straightforward doctrinal analysis, although an alternative result founded in legal theory and precedent was available. Although this decision appears to promote environmental interests, analysis of the case reveals an important negative impact on civil procedure doctrine. United States Forest Service, the Ninth Circuit reversed a lower court finding of claim preclusion due to virtual representation of the plaintiffs in a prior case, thus allowing a citizen suit challenging the Forest Service's decision to allow logging in national forests in Oregon and California to advance. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |