Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Lyng

899 F.2d 1565, 1990 WL 44231
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 19, 1990·No. No. 88-4092·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

ORDER

In his petition for rehearing, the Secretary contends that he was not given an adequate opportunity to be heard on the issue of attorneys’ fees. We agree. Accordingly, the opinion is amended by deleting Section IV entitled “Attorneys’ Fees," 882 F.2d 1417 at pages 1427-28 and replacing it with the following:

ONRC seeks attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act for both the underlying district court action and for the appeal. Pursuant to Circuit Rule 39-1.8, consideration of all such fee matters is ordered transferred for a determination de novo to the district court.

At page 1428, the fourth sentence of the CONCLUSION starting with “On remand, the district court....” is ordered deleted from the opinion.

With the opinion so amended, the panel has voted unanimously to deny the petitions for rehearing filed by both parties. Both are denied.

SO ORDERED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Lyng, 899 F.2d 1565, 1990 WL 44231 (9th Cir. 1990).

899 F.2d 1565 (Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Lyng) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Pence
22 F. Supp. 2d 1136 (D. Oregon, 1998)
Cross Timbers Concerned Citizens v. Saginaw
991 F. Supp. 563 (N.D. Texas, 1997)
Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. Richmond
841 F. Supp. 1039 (D. Oregon, 1993)
Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Madigan
980 F.2d 1330 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
Coker v. Skidmore
941 F.2d 1306 (Fifth Circuit, 1991)
Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Lyng
756 F. Supp. 467 (D. Oregon, 1991)