1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 198 F.3d
  5. 198 F.3d 360 (1999)
 

U.S. v. CITY OF NEW YORK

Docket Nos. 98-6146, 98-6162.

198 F.3d 360 (1999)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, State of New York and Barbara A. DeBuono, M.D., as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees, v. CITY OF NEW YORK and New York City Department of Environmental Protection, Defendants-Appellees, Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition, Inc., HDFC Coalition, Marian Rose, Jesse Davidson, David Ferguson, Marie Runyon, Francis A. Chapman, Mickie Grover, Paul Moskowitz, Edith T. Keasbey, Dart Westphal, Howard Jackson, Brian Jackson, Tina Argenti, Karen Argenti, Dorothy Vaughn, Helen C. Reed, Steven B. Kaplan, Aaron Bock, and Darnley E. Beckles, Jr., Proposed-Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Decided: December 16, 1999.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Deborah B. Zwany, Assistant United States Attorney (Zachary W. Carter, United States Attorney, Varuni Nelson, Assistant United States Attorney, on the brief), Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, N.Y., for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Gordon J. Johnson, Attorney General's Office, State of New York, New York, N.Y., for Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees.

Stuart D. Smith, of counsel (Michael D. Hess, Corporation Counsel, Barry P. Schwartz, of counsel, on the brief), City of New York, New York, N.Y., for Defendants-Appellees.

John C. Klotz, New York, NY, for Proposed — Defendant — Intervenor — Appellant Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition, Inc.

Before: WALKER, CABRANES, and SACK, Circuit Judges.

JOHN M. WALKER, Jr., Circuit Judge:

Appellants Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition et al. ("Coalition") sought to intervene as defendants in this action brought by the United States to enforce the obligations of New York City ("City") under federal law to ensure the safety of its drinking water. The Coalition contends that the district judge erred in denying its motion to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24. We disagree and thus affirm the district...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases