National Audubon v. Hoffman

1. Who were the parties involved in the case? (plaintiff/defendant/respondent/petitioner)

the plaintiffs: James Northup, Ellen Kingsbury Viereck, Tyler Resch, Mathew Jacobson

the defendants:

Terry Hoffman, former Forest Supervisor of the Green Mountain National Forest,

James Bartelme, Forest Supervisor of the Green Mountain National Forest,

Michael Schrotz, Manchester District Ranger

Floyd Butch Marita, Regional Forester, in their official capacities as employees of the U.S.D.A. Forest Service

2. What were the facts in the case?

The Forest Service planned extensive timber cutting in a part of the Green Mountain National Forest but did not prepare an environmental impact statement. A coalition of conservation organizations and environmentalists, believing that the action would have potential negative impact on black bears, whose habitat would be disturbed, and endanger the neotropical bird population, filed a lawsuit to compel the Forest Service to prepare the EIS. The district court found that the Forest Service had failed to consider all relevant factors when determining the environmental significance of its proposed action and was directed to prepare a site-specific EIS and enjoined from further timber harvesting and road building until completion of the EIS.

3. What was the Rule of Law in the case? (Rule of law the court applies to determine the rights of the parties)

Fill in the blank

4.Who won the case? Why?

Fill in the blank