Vieux Carre Property Owners, Residents & Associates, Inc. v. Colonel Lloyd Kent Brown, Etc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a private right of action existed under the Preservation Act against a federal agency
• explaining that “only a federal agency can violate” the NHPA provisions
• \[I]t is implicit in Rule 19(a) itself that before a party will be joined ... as a defendant the plaintiff must have a cause of action against it.\
• “[I]t is implicit in [Federal] Rule 19(a) itself that before a party will be joined . . . as a defendant the plaintiff must have a cause of action against it.”
• “We fail to understand, however, how APA-dictated reviewability of the Corps’ decisions allegedly violating the [Rivers and Harbors Act] gives the district court jurisdiction to enjoin such nonfederal entities as the Audubon Park Commission.”
• addressing Hodel at length and describing its reasoning as “faulty”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).