§Why CasetextPricing

Beverly Hills Unified School District v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction

333 Cited authorities

  1. Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc.

    555 U.S. 7 (2008)   Cited 16,785 times   56 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff must establish "that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm"

  2. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 27,840 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  3. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America

    511 U.S. 375 (1994)   Cited 18,991 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that absent a reservation of jurisdiction in the stipulated dismissal order, federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider enforcement of a settlement agreement

  4. Lewis v. Casey

    518 U.S. 343 (1996)   Cited 14,289 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a prisoner must show an actual injury to state a claim for denial of access to courts

  5. Steel Co. v. Citizens for Better Env't

    523 U.S. 83 (1998)   Cited 10,740 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court "act ultra vires" when it assumes "hypothetical jurisdiction" in order to rule on the merits

  6. Shinseki v. Sanders

    556 U.S. 396 (2009)   Cited 4,489 times
    Holding that a "notice error" was harmless because the respondent "ha[d] not explained to the Veterans Court, to the Federal Circuit, or to us how the notice error to which he points could have made any difference"

  7. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.

    528 U.S. 167 (2000)   Cited 7,153 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing

  8. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,020 times   502 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"

  9. Mayle v. Felix

    545 U.S. 644 (2005)   Cited 4,597 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that amendments to habeas petitions relate back under Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(c) where they are “tied to a common core of operative facts” and citing with approval Mandacina v. United States, 328 F.3d 995, 999–1000 (8th Cir.2003) (amended petition alleging failure to disclose a particular report relates back to date of original petition generally alleging Brady violation)

  10. Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation

    497 U.S. 871 (1990)   Cited 9,537 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to admit affidavits in support of standing when filed after summary judgment briefing and hearing were complete

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 345,981 times   922 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 97,434 times   134 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  13. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 90,557 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

  14. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 28,286 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  15. Section 2201 - Creation of remedy

    28 U.S.C. § 2201   Cited 24,534 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment

  16. Section 706 - Scope of review

    5 U.S.C. § 706   Cited 20,443 times   184 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"

  17. Rule 25 - Substitution of Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 25   Cited 10,697 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Providing for the automatic substitution at the district-court level of public officers sued in their official capacities

  18. Section 701 - Application; definitions

    5 U.S.C. § 701   Cited 9,366 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the definition given in Section 551

  19. Section 702 - Right of review

    5 U.S.C. § 702   Cited 7,053 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Granting judicial review of "agency action"

  20. Section 1344 - Bank fraud

    18 U.S.C. § 1344   Cited 4,907 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Defining the maximum prison terms for wire fraud that affects a financial institution and bank fraud, which define the penalties for the conspiracy crime that Anderson pleaded guilty to according to 18 U.S.C. § 1349, as "not more than 30 years"

  21. Section 1500.1 - Purpose and policy

    40 C.F.R. § 1500.1   Cited 461 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that the purpose of NEPA's procedures is to make information available before decisions are made

  22. Section 1502.24 - Environmental review and consultation requirements

    40 C.F.R. § 1502.24   Cited 111 times
    Noting that agencies should "make explicit reference . . . to the scientific and other sources relied upon for conclusions in the statement"

  23. Section 1502.2 - Implementation

    40 C.F.R. § 1502.2   Cited 106 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating that, "[a]s in a finding of no significant impact," in an EIS' treatment of "other than significant issues ... there should be only enough discussion to show why more study is not warranted"

  24. Section 1500.3 - NEPA compliance

    40 C.F.R. § 1500.3   Cited 100 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Providing that CEQ guidelines are binding on all federal agencies

  25. Section 1505.2 - Record of decision in cases requiring environmental impact statements

    40 C.F.R. § 1505.2   Cited 89 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that “[a]t the time of its decision or, if appropriate, its recommendation to Congress, each agency shall prepare a concise public record of decision”

  26. Section 1506.1 - Limitations on actions during NEPA process

    40 C.F.R. § 1506.1   Cited 88 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Requiring suspension of agency action if “the action is not covered by an existing program statement”

  27. Section 1506.5 - Agency responsibility for environmental documents

    40 C.F.R. § 1506.5   Cited 83 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Stating that "acceptable work" by applicants need not be redone by the agency so long as the agency independently evaluates it

  28. Section 1503.1 - Inviting comments and requesting information and analyses

    40 C.F.R. § 1503.1   Cited 79 times
    Explaining agencies' duties to invite and to respond to public comments on draft environmental impact statements

  29. Section 771.130 - Supplemental environmental impact statements

    23 C.F.R. § 771.130   Cited 56 times
    Providing that "[a]n EIS shall be supplemented whenever the Administration determines" certain circumstances exist

  30. Section 774.17 - Definitions

    23 C.F.R. § 774.17   Cited 34 times
    Stating that an alternative is not prudent if: it “compromises the project to a degree that it is unreasonable to proceed with the project in light of its stated purpose and need”; causes severe “social, economic, or environmental impacts,” “disruption to established communities,” or “impacts to environmental resources protected under other Federal statutes”; “results in additional construction, maintenance, or operational costs of an extraordinary magnitude”; or “involves multiple factors in ... this definition, that while individually minor, cumulatively cause unique problems or impacts of extraordinary magnitude”