|Posted by nationalforestlawblog on February 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM|
Barnum Timber company challenged the EPA's designation of the Redwood Creek Watershed as "impaired". According to Barnum, this clasification has the effect of increasing the costs of harvesting timber and significantly impairs the value of its land. However, the lower court tossed out Barnum's suit arguing that it had not sustained an injury in-fact that would provide it with standing to challenge the EPA's suit. The 9th Circuit, however, disagreed:
"Barnum alleges as its injury-in-fact that it suffered a reduction in the economic value of its property in the Redwood Creek watershed," Judge Jay Bybee wrote for the panel. "A specific, concrete, and particularized allegation of a reduction in the value of property owned by the plaintiff is sufficient to demonstrate injury-in-fact at the pleading stage."
You can read the full text decision at the 9th Circuit's website here.