green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 6×
8.4 score
“controversial" should not be equated with "neighborhood opposition.”
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 33 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Como-Falcon Coalition, Inc. v. United States Department of Labor
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
But cf. Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 , 832 & n. 10 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973). 3 However, the pro *858 posed Job Corps center does not threaten merely “people pollution.” Plaintiff has pointed out other values which it seeks to protect such as freedom from traffic congestion and criminal activity, and preservation of the character of the neighborhood.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Fund for Animals v. Babbitt
controversial" should not be equated with "neighborhood opposition.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United Neighbors Civic Ass'n of Jamaica, Inc. v. Pierce
hanly ii
cited
Cited "see"
Sierra Club v. Watkins
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 834-5 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908, 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973). 32 .
cited
Cited "see"
Coalition on Sensible Transportation Inc. v. Dole
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 831 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973). b.
discussed
Cited "see"
State of Wisconsin, and County of Marquette, Michigan, Intervening v. Caspar W. Weinberger, Individually and as Secretary of the Department of Defense
(2×)
Accord Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 830 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
cited
Cited "see"
Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Engineers
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
cited
Cited "see"
Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps Of Engineers
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
cited
Cited "see"
People Against Nuclear Energy v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 838 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
cited
Cited "see"
People Against Nuclear Energy v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 838 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
cited
Cited "see"
Joseph v. Adams
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (CA 2, 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973) (Hanly II).
cited
Cited "see"
Concerned About Trident v. Schlesinger
See, Hanly v. Kleindeinst, 471 F.2d 823, 830-31 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973). 2 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Marchman
See United States v. Willis, 473 F.2d 450, 452 (6th Cir.), cert. den., 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see"
Chelsea Neighborhood Associations v. United States Postal Service
See Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973). 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (A) requires that the Postal Service take an interdisciplinary approach using the social sciences in decision making of the sort here contemplated.
discussed
Cited "see"
Arizona Public Service Company v. Federal Power Commission, the People of the State of California, Intervenors
See Scientists’ Institute for Public Information, Inc. v. AEC, 481 F.2d 1079, 1094-1095 (D.C.Cir. 1973), and Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Friends of the Ompompanoosuc, State of Vermont v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
See Swinomish Tribal Community v. F.E.R.C., 627 F.2d 499, 512 (D.C.Cir.1980) (noting that Commission’s requirement of extensive mitigation measures aimed at minimizing the aesthetic impacts of the project demonstrated that it seriously considered those impacts); see also Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 832 (2d Cir.1972) (affirming agency decision that mitigation measures would minimize aesthetic impact of project), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Town of Rye, New York v. Skinner
Sec. 1501.4 (1989); FAA Order 5050.4A Sec. 18(a); see also Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 836 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973), the FAA more than complied with this requirement.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Town of Rye v. Skinner
While NEPA and the regulations promulgated under it encourage public involvement in the preparation of environmental assessments, see, e.g., 40 C.F.R. § 1501.4 (1989); FAA Order 5050.4A § 18(a); see also Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 836 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973), the FAA more than complied with this requirement.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nancy H. Gee v. Claude D. Boyd, Iii, Etc.
See also Foundation for North American Wild Sheep v. United States Dept. of Agriculture, 681 F.2d, at 1178; Pokorny v. Costle, 464 F.Supp. 1273, 1276 (Neb.1979). 4 The test used by the District of Columbia Circuit in scrutinizing an agency's finding of "no significant impact" is: "(1) whether the agency took a 'hard look' at the problem; "(2) whether the agency identified the relevant areas of environmental concern; "(3) as to the problems studied and identified, whether the agency made a convincing case that the impact was insignificant; and "(4) if there was an impact of true significance, w…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Julio Quinonez-Lopez v. Coco Lagoon Development Corporation
Compare, e.g., City of Davis v. Coleman, 521 F.2d 661, 673-74 (9th Cir.1975) (relatively searching review of “reasonableness”) and Save Our Ten Acres v. Kreger, 472 F.2d 463, 466-67 (5th Cir.1973) (same) with, e.g., First National Bank of Chicago v. Richardson, 484 F.2d 1369, 1381 (7th Cir.1973) (more deferential “arbitrary or capricious” standard) and Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 828-29 (2d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973) (similar); see generally Township of Lower Alloways Creek v. Public Service Electric & Gas Co., 687 F.2d 732, 74…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Preservation Coalition, Inc. v. Pierce
See, e.g., Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973), and later appeal, 484 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 936 , 94 S.Ct. 1934 , 40 L.Ed.2d 286 (1974); Portela v. Pierce, 650 F.2d 210, 213 (9th Cir. 1981) ("environmental clearance"); City and County of San Francisco v. United States, 615 F.2d 498, 500 (9th Cir. 1980); City of Davis v. Coleman, 521 F.2d 661, 674 (9th Cir. 1975) ("negative declaration").
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Preservation Coalition, Inc. v. Pierce
See, e.g., Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973), and later appeal, 484 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 936 , 94 S.Ct. 1934 , 40 L.Ed.2d 286 (1974); Portela v. Pierce, 650 F.2d 210, 213 (9th Cir. 1981) (“environmental clearance”); City and County of San Francisco v. United States, 615 F.2d 498, 500 (9th Cir. 1980); City of Davis v. Coleman, 521 F.2d 661, 674 (9th Cir. 1975) (“negative declaration”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Aertsen v. Landrieu
Compare Nucleus of Chicago Home Owners Ass’n v. Lynn, 524 F.2d 225, 229-30 (7th Cir. 1975), cert, denied, 424 U.S. 967 , 96 S.Ct. 1462 , 47 L.Ed.2d 734 (1976), and Haniy v. Kleindienst, All F.2d 823, 828-30 (2d Cir. 1972), cert, denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973) (cases employed an “arbitrary and capricious” standard), with Minnesota Public Interest Research Group v. Butz, 498 F.2d 1314, 1320 (8th Cir. 1974) (en banc), and Wyoming Outdoor Coordinating Council v. Butz, 484 F.2d 1244 , 1248 49 (10th Cir. 1973), and Save Our Ten Acres v. Kreger, 472 F.2d 463, 466-6…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Get Oil Out, Inc. v. Andrus
See also Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973); Kelley v. Butz, 404 F.Supp. 925 (W.D.Mich.1975).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Texas Committee on Natural Resources v. Bergland
See, e. g., Hanly v. Kleindienst (Hanly II), 471 F.2d 823, 830 (2d Cir. 1972) , cert. den., 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973). 9.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Morgan v. United States Postal Service
See, e. g., Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 829-30 (2nd Cir. 1972) , cert. den. 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973); First National Bank v. Richardson, 484 F.2d 1369, 1381 (7th Cir. 1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rhode Island Committee on Energy v. General Services Administration
(2×)
See also Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823, 836 (2d Cir. 1972) (Friendly, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Maryland - National Capital Park and Planning Commission a Public Body Corporate v. U. S. Postal Service
Compare Hanly v. Kleindienst II, 471 F.2d 823, 830-831 (2d Cir. 1972), cert, denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973). 3 The policy goals of NEPA are to be achieved “in cooperation with State and local governments.” Section 101(a), 42 U.S.C. § 4331 (a).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Conservation Society of Southern Vermont, Inc. v. Secretary of Transportation
See also Hanly v. Kleindienst, 471 F.2d 823 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2290 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973); Hanly v. Mitchell, 460 F.2d 640 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 990 , 93 S.Ct. 313 , 34 L.Ed.2d 256 (1972).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hanly
v.
Kleindienst, Attorney General
v.
Kleindienst, Attorney General
No. 72-1209.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 21, 1973.
Certiorari.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 2d Cir. Application for stay presented to Mr. Justice Marshall, and by him referred to the Court, denied. Certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice Douglas would grant certiorari.