United States Fourth Circuit

Where plaintiffs described their injuries to be the deleterious effects they believed the Fish and Wildlife Service's acquisition of certain property would impart by precluding the construction of certain improvements, yet could not establish that the improvements would be built but for the acquisition, they could not satisfy the standing requirement that the injury in fact be actual or imminent, and not conjectural or hypothetical, nor could they meet the traceability and redressability requirements of the standing inquiry.

Appellate Information

• Argued 01/22/2002
• Decided 02/28/2002
• Published 02/28/2002

Judges

• Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Carl Strass, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellants. Kent Pendleton Porter, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  Kenneth E. Melson, United States Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.