1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. RUSSELL v. NEW MEXICO INTERSTATE STREAM COMMISSION
 

RUSSELL v. NEW MEXICO INTERSTATE STREAM COMMISSION

No. CIV-13-00760 KG/LAM.

EMORY RUSSELL; STEVE LYMAN; GARY KELLEY; LEE MALLOY; LARRY ROBINSON; GARY HAMILTON; ART SCHAAP; and GUY SMITH, Plaintiffs, v. THE NEW MEXICO INTERSTATE STREAM COMMISSION; THE NEW MEXICO ENERGY, MINERALS AND NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, STATE PARKS DIVISION; ESTEVAN LOPEZ, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Director of the NEW MEXICO INTERSTATE STREAM COMMISSION; TOMMY MUTZ, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Director of the NEW MEXICO STATE PARKS DIVISION, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. New Mexico.

August 29, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Emory Russell, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

Steve Lyman, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

Gary Kelley, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

Lee Malloy, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

Larry Robinson, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

Gary Hamilton, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

Art Schaap, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

Guy Smith, Plaintiff, represented by Warren F Frost, Warren F. Frost, PC.

New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission, Defendant, represented by Scott P Hatcher, Hatcher & Tebo PA.

New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, State Parks Division, Defendant, represented by Scott P Hatcher, Hatcher & Tebo PA.

Estevan Lopez, Defendant, represented by Scott P Hatcher, Hatcher & Tebo PA.

Tommy Mutz, Defendant, represented by Scott P Hatcher, Hatcher & Tebo PA.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

KENNETH J. GONZALES, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court upon Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Motion for Summary Judgment), filed on February 11, 2014. (Doc. 51). On April 17, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a response to the Motion for Summary Judgment and on May 12, 2014, Defendants filed a reply. (Docs. 59 and 66). On April 21, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum Brief in Support...

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