Hillsdale Environmental Loss Prevention, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that plaintiffs’ “attempt to create a per se rule that any potential impact to drinking water, however minor, requires preparation of an EIS is thus unconvincing”
• holding “[c]ontroversy in this context does not mean opposition to a project, but rather a substantial dispute as to the size, nature, or effect of the action”
• “[E]ven if an agency violates the APA, its error does not require reversal unless a plaintiff demonstrates prejudice resulting from the error.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).