PEARCE JOHNSON ET AL., PLAINTIFFSAPPELLEES,
v.
ROGERS C. B. MORTON, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing because their alleged injury was not a direct injury in fact caused by the federal action, but rather a consequence of state-level decisions regarding fund allocation.
Plaintiffs, including a state official who voted against a land purchase, sued to stop federal funding for the acquisition of Mustang Island, alleging…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Standing (Legal) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en bane, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.
. The district court sustained a motion to strike all references in the complaint to a class action and permitted the suit to go forward in the names of plaintiffs as individuals.
. Here the ruling on standing was made after the case was heard on the merits. The record, however, does not disclose any variance between the allegations contained in the pleadings and the evidence adduced upon the hearing.
. The defendants, in addition to the Secretary and Mrs. Wilson, the landowner, are Messrs. Gilvin, Jersig, Singleton, other officers in the Parks Department, as well as the Treasurer and Comptroller of Texas. All state officer defendants are represented here by the Attorney General of Texas. Plaintiff Johnson, also a state officer, is represented by private counsel.
. On the merits, there is a sharp question as to whether the State Liaison Officer had any real power in the premises in view of the supervening Texas Statute, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Civ.Stat. Art. 6081r, which constituted the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission as the state agency to cooperate with the federal government with respect to all federal assistance programs having to do with the acquisition and development of outdoor recreation resources, and specifically under the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund Act here in issue.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Korioth v. Honorable Dolph Briscoe, 523 F.2d 1271 (5th Cir. 1975)
-
Higginbotham v. Barrett, 473 F.2d 745 (5th Cir. 1973)
-
Francis P. and E. Edith McCULLOUGH v. Redev. Auth. OF the City OF Wilkes-Barre, 522 F.2d 858 (3d Cir. 1975)
Authorities Cited (15 total)
- Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (U.S. 1962)
- Ass'n of Data Processing Serv. Orgs., Inc. v. Camp, 397 U.S. 150 (U.S. 1970)
- Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1968)
- Barlow v. Collins, 397 U.S. 159 (U.S. 1970)
- Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 354 F.2d 608 (2d Cir. 1965)
- Env't Def. Fund v. Hardin, 428 F.2d 1093 (D.C. Cir. 1970)
- Sierra Club v. Hickel, 433 F.2d 24 (9th Cir. 1970)
- Nashville I-40 Steering Comm. v. Buford Ellington, 387 F.2d 179 (6th Cir. 1967)
- Troutman v. Sargent Shriver, 417 F.2d 171 (5th Cir. 1969)
- Hilgeneck v. United States, 397 U.S. 923 (U.S. 1970)