Court: US agency acted reasonably to protect seals
Recent Cases
An appeals court panel on Monday ruled that a federal agency acted reasonably in proposing to list a certain population of bearded seals threatened by sea ice loss.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reverses a lower court ruling that found the decision by the National Marine Fisheries Service was improper.
At issue was whether the fisheries service can protect species as threatened under the Endangered Species Act when it determines that a currently non-endangered species will lose habitat due to climate change in coming decades.
In 2014, a federal judge in Alaska found there was no discernible, quantified threat of extinction within the foreseeable future for the seals and determined the listing decision was arbitrary.
But the appeals court panel ruling issued Monday said the fisheries service relied on the best available scientific data and seriously considered the comments it received. The panel's opinion also noted a high bar for overturning an agency action.
The service's listing decision was challenged by the Alaska Oil and Gas Association and others, who argued, among other things, that the seal population appeared to be healthy and the service's use of climate projections beyond 2050 were speculative.
Joshua Kindred, environmental counsel for the oil and gas association, cited concern with the level of research that contributed to the service's finding, saying there was a "failure to engage in that critical mass of scientific research."
He said the ruling was still being reviewed and a decision on any further steps had not been made yet.
The appeals court panel also rejected the state of Alaska's argument that the service failed to address several of its substantive comments, saying the record indicates otherwise.
Related listings
-
Greece court cancels TV license overhaul; blow to government
Recent Cases 10/26/2016A high court has canceled a television license auction in Greece, dealing a blow to the country's left-wing government which carried out the sale as part of an anti-corruption drive. Judges from the Council of State court ruled 14-11 late Wednesday t...
-
Court hearing on potential Ontario ban of Indians name, logo
Recent Cases 10/17/2016A Toronto court will hear arguments on an attempt to bar the Cleveland Indians from using their team name and logo in Ontario. The legal challenge by indigenous activist Douglas Cardinal comes on the same day the baseball team takes on the Toronto Bl...
-
Court: Construction can resume on small stretch of pipeline
Recent Cases 10/10/2016A federal appeals court on Sunday opened the door for construction to resume on a small stretch of the four-state Dakota Access pipeline while it considers an appeal by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. The ruling removed a temporary injunction that hal...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.