Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the standard for supplementing an EA is the same as for an EIS
• noting that the preparation of supplemental environmental impact statements is sometimes necessary to comply with NEPA
• stating that courts are to review factual disputes that implicate substantial agency expertise under the arbitrary and capricious standard
• holding courts should avoid a construction of two statutes that leads to a “dichomotous result”
• stating that courts are to review factual disputes that implicate substantial agency expertise under the arbitrary and capricious standard
• applying arbitrary and capricious standard to the adequacy of an EIS under the NEPA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).