United States Ninth Circuit

In a challenge against Congressional mandate that some of the Trinity River's water be returned to it, the Court reversed the district court findings that the scope of the EIS and the range of alternatives considered was unreasonable and its injunctive orders to supplement the EIS to address the issues raised on appeal.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/09/2004
• Decided 07/13/2004
• Published 07/13/2004

Judges

• GOODWIN, Circuit Judge:, Before: GOODWIN, TASHIMA, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Sally Magnani Knox, Deputy Attorney General, Oakland, CA, for amicus curiae People of the State of California.


• For Appellees:
  
• Katherine Barton,Department of Justice, for the federal defendants-appellants/appellees., Thomas Schlosser, Morisset, Schlosser, Jozwiak & McGaw, Seattle, WA, for defendants-intervenors-appellants/appellees Hoopa Valley Tribe., Scott W. Williams, Alexander, Berkey, Williams & Weathers, Berkeley, CA, for defendant-intervenor-appellant/cross-appellee Yurok Tribe., Eric N. Robinson, Daniel J. O'Hanlon, Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard, Sacramento, for plaintiffs-appellees/cross-appellants water agencies., Kelly L. Drumm, Brian S. Haughton, Barg Coffin Lewis & Trapp, San Francisco, CA, for plaintiff-intervenor/appellee Northern California Power Agency.