State of Idaho v. Freeman, III, 625 F.2d 886 (9th Cir. 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
State of Idaho v. Freeman, III, 625 F.2d 886 (9th Cir. 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
54 citation events (19 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, etal. v. Kootenai County Idaho (idd, 2023-11-02)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, etal. v. Kootenai County Idaho
D. Idaho · 2023 · confidence medium
Trades v. Spellman, 684 F.2d 627 , 630 (9th Cir. 1982) (holding public interest group that sponsored the challenged initiative had sufficiently protectable interest in defending its constitutionality and was entitled to intervention as a matter of right under Rule 24(a)); State of Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d 886, 887 (9th Cir. 1980) (holding public interest group had sufficiently protectable interests in a cause which that organization had championed).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Elizabeth Cady Stanton Trust v. Neronha
D.R.I. · 2023 · confidence medium
It is significant that was a 270-word opinion devoid of analysis, declaring that “NOW has [such] an [intervenor] interest in the continued vitality of ERA, which would as a practical matter be significantly impaired by an adverse decision and which is incompletely represented here.” 625 F.2d at 887. action.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kevin Cooper v. Gavin Newsom (2×)
9th Cir. · 2022 · confidence medium
Judge Bumatay Dissent at 21–23 (citing Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d 886, 887 (9th Cir. 1980); Washington State Bldg. & Constr.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Northland Family Planning Clinic, Inc. v. Michael A. Cox
6th Cir. · 2007 · confidence medium
See id. ("In contrast to the cases cited by Hillandale Committee in its brief, this case raises no issue as to the validity of the election."); see also Idaho Farm Bureau, 58 F.3d at 1397 (involving an underlying suit challenging the process by which a rule was adopted by the Secretary of the Interior); Sagebrush Rebellion, 713 F.2d at 526 (same); Freeman, 625 F.2d at 886 (underlying suit involved state procedure for ratification of constitutional amendment).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Northland Family Planning Clinic, Inc. v. Cox
6th Cir. · 2007 · confidence medium
See id. (“In contrast to the cases cited by Hillandale Committee in its brief, this case raises no issue as to the validity of the election.”); see also Idaho Farm Bureau, 58 F.3d at 1397 (involving an underlying suit challenging the process by which a rule was adopted by the Secretary of the Interior); Sagebrush Rebellion, 713 F.2d at 526 (same); Freeman, 625 F.2d at 886 (underlying suit involved state procedure for ratification of constitutional amendment).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Benny v. England (In re Benny)
9th Cir. · 1986 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d at 887 (National Organization for Women had interest in Equal Rights Amendment that would be affected by outcome of suit challenging constitutional amendment ratification procedures).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re George I. Benny and Alexandra Benny, Debtors. (Four Cases) Alexandra Benny, Debtor-Appellant v. John M. England, Trustee Chicago Title Insurance Company, Creditor, Etc., United States of America, Intervenor-Appellant v. John M. England, Trustee, Chicago Title Insurance Company, Creditor, Etc., Keith M. Lundin, Mark B. McFeely William L. Norton, George C. Paine, Iii, Hugh Robinson and Arthur N. Votolato, Jr., Bankruptcy Judges, Applicants for Intervention-Appellants v. Alexandra Benny, Debtor-Appellee. United States of America, Intervenor-Petitioner-Appellee v. John M. England, Trustee Chicago Title Insurance Company, Creditor, Etc.
9th Cir. · 1986 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d at 887 (National Organization for Women had interest in Equal Rights Amendment that would be affected by outcome of suit challenging constitutional amendment ratification procedures).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) West Winds, Inc. v. M.V. Resolute
9th Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
Accordingly, the district court held that the applicants-in-intervention did not allege "an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action" as required for intervention of right under Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2). 5 * Intervention of right under Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2):requires a timely showing that the applicant possesses an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the suit and is so situated that the disposition of the suit may as a practical matter impair the ability to protect that interest, and in addition that the applicant's in…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) West Winds, Inc. v. M.V. Resolute
9th Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
State of Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d 886, 887 (9th Cir.1980) (citations omitted); see Sagebrush Rebellion, Inc. v. Watt, 713 F.2d 525, 527 (9th Cir.1983); Smith v. Pangili-nan, 651 F.2d 1320, 1323-25 (9th Cir.1981); Blake v. Pallan, 554 F.2d 947, 951-55 (9th Cir.1977).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Sagebrush Rebellion, Inc. v. Watt
9th Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
In Freeman, we stated that the application for intervention asserted an interest “which is incompletely represented here.” 625 F.2d at 887.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Sagebrush Rebellion, Inc. v. Watt
9th Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
I suggest the limit has been met here. 33 In Freeman, we stated that the application for intervention asserted an interest "which is incompletely represented here." 625 F.2d at 887.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Estate of Lucius Earl Dixon, C. G. Vaughan, Lois K. Dixon, Intervenor-Appellant v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
9th Cir. · 1982 · confidence medium
Estate of Smith v. C.I.R., 638 F.2d at 668 ; State of Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d 886, 887 (9th Cir. 1980); McClune v. Shamah, 593 F.2d 482, 485 (3rd Cir. 1979); May v. C.I.R., supra, 553 F.2d at 1208.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Michigan State Afl-Cio v. Miller (2×)
6th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Idaho Farm Bureau Fed'n v. Babbitt, 58 F.3d 1392 , 1397 (9th Cir.1995); Sagebrush Rebellion, Inc. v. Watt, 713 F.2d 525, 527 (9th Cir.1983); see also State of Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d 886 (9th Cir.1980).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Michigan State v. Miller (2×)
6th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Idaho Farm Bureau Fed’n v. Babbitt, 58 F.3d 1392 , 1397 (9th Cir.1995); Sagebrush Rebellion, Inc. v. Watt, 713 F.2d 525, 527 (9th Cir.1983); see also State of Idaho v. Freeman, 625 F.2d 886 (9th Cir.1980).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The State of Idaho, and Claude L. Oliver, Etc.
v.
Rear Admiral Rowland G. Freeman, III Administrator of General Services Administration, and National Organization for Women, Applicant for Intervention-Appellant
79-4844.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Aug 15, 1980.
625 F.2d 886
Published

625 F.2d 886

The STATE OF IDAHO et al., Appellees, and
Claude L. Oliver, etc. et al., Appellees,
v.
Rear Admiral Rowland G. FREEMAN, III Administrator of
General Services Administration, Appellee, and
National Organization for Women et al., Applicant for
Intervention-Appellant.

No. 79-4844.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 15, 1980.

Thomas J. Hart, Lippman & Hart, Washington, D. C., argued, for appellant.

Larry K. Harvey, Chief Deputy, Boise, Idaho, Michael P. Farris, Spokane, Wash., argued, for appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho.

Before ELY and POOLE, Circuit Judges, and REDDEN[*], District judge.

POOLE, Circuit Judge:

1

The National Organization for Women (NOW) appeals from the denial of its motion to intervene pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 24 in a suit challenging procedures for ratification of the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the Constitution of the United States. The States of Idaho and Arizona and over eighty members of their respective state legislatures are plaintiffs in this action against the Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA), the agency which performs ministerial tasks in connection with the amendatory process. The district court had previously allowed four members of the legislature of the State of Washington to intervene as additional plaintiffs, but denied NOW's application on October 10, 1979.

2

Intervention of right requires a timely showing that the applicant possesses an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the suit and is so situated that the disposition of the suit may as a practical matter impair the ability to protect that interest, and in addition that the applicant's interest is not adequately represented by the existing parties. Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2); County of Fresno v. Andrus, 622 F.2d 436 at 438, slip op. at 4002 (9th Cir. 1980); Blake v. Pallan, 554 F.2d 947, 951 (9th Cir. 1977).

3

We hold that NOW has such an interest in the continued vitality of ERA, which would as a practical matter be significantly impaired by an adverse decision and which is incompletely represented here. Consequently, the district court erred in denying intervention, and its order of October 10, 1979, is reversed. The stay of proceedings previously entered by this Court is hereby vacated and the mandate shall issue forthwith.

4

REVERSED.

*

Honorable James A. Redden, United States District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation