Matter of Benavides v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an EIS must consider the extent to which adverse effects can be avoided by discussing possible mitigation measures
• holding that the agency’s changed interpretation, which “came after the prior regulation had been subjected to considerable criticism,” was entitled to substantial deference
• holding that failure to place a dollar value on possible decrease in property value was not unreasonable
• holding that NEPA requires neither that actions be taken to mitigate adverse effects of federal actions, nor that an EIS include an explanation of what measures will be employed to mitigate adverse environmental impacts
• holding that NEPA requires neither that actions be taken to mitigate adverse effects of federal actions, nor that an EIS include an explanation of what measures will be employed to mitigate adverse environmental impacts
• holding that “[i]f the adverse environmental effects of the proposed action are adequately identified and evaluated, the agency is not constrained by NEPA from deciding that other values outweigh the environmental costs”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).