- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Montana
- /
- Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. Marten
Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. Marten
Geography
Year
2020
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2020
Status
Motion to dismiss granted.
Geography
Docket number
2:20-cv-00031
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → United States District Court for the District of Montana (D. Mont.)
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → NEPA (US)
Principal law
United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
At issue
Lawsuit alleging violations of the National Environmental Policy Act for failure to prepare supplemental analyses of national forest plans and projects in light of new information about climate change.
Topics
, ,  
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics 
Beta
Search results
12/17/2020
Motion to dismiss granted.
The federal district court for the District of Montana dismissed a lawsuit that sought to compel the U.S. Forest Service to supplement the 1987 forest plan for the Custer Gallatin National Forest and for three projects authorized under the forest plan. The court rejected arguments that new climate change research and a decision to revise the 1987 forest plan to address climate change triggered supplementation requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Decision
–
07/21/2020
Complaint filed.
A conservation group filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the District of Montana asserting that the U.S. Forest Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to prepare supplemental NEPA analysis in light of new scientific information regarding climate change. The plaintiffs alleged that the Forest Service approved a watershed project and a forest health project based on an environmental impact statement for a 1987 forest plan.
Complaint
–
Summary
Lawsuit alleging violations of the National Environmental Policy Act for failure to prepare supplemental analyses of national forest plans and projects in light of new information about climate change.
 Topics mentioned most in this case  Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Risk
Just transition
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance