Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. R. Keith Higginson (1979)

See Mausolf, 85 F.3d at 1303 ; Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979).

See Mausolf, 85 F.3d at 1303 ; Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979).

To overcome this presumption, the applicant must show "that its interest is in fact different from that of the [governmental entity] and that the interest will not be represented by [it]." Hopwood, 21 F.3d at 605 (quoting Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979)).

To overcome this presumption, the applicant must show “that its interest is in fact different from that of the [governmental entity] and that the interest will not be represented by [it].” Hopwood, 21 F.3d at 605 (quoting Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979)).

Under the parens patriae doctrine, “a state that is a party to a suit involving a matter of sovereign interest is presumed to represent the interests of all its citizens.” Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979).

New Orleans Public Service v. United Gas Pipe Line Co., 690 F.2d 1203 , 1213 n. 7 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 434 , 83 L.Ed.2d 360 (1984); Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979).

When a state is a party to a suit involving a matter of sovereign interest, it is presumed to represent the interests of its citizens, Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979); Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Rizzo, supra, 530 F.2d at 505 , and thus, to intervene in a suit in which the state is already a party, a subdivision of the state must overcome this presumptipn.

When a state is a party to a suit involving a matter of sovereign interest, it is presumed to represent the interests of its citizens, Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979); Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Rizzo, supra, 530 F.2d at 505 , and thus, to intervene in a suit in which the state is already a party, a subdivision of the state must overcome this presumption.

United States Postal Serv. v. Brennan, 579 F.2d 188 , 191 (2d Cir.1978). [14] While the burden of proving inadequate representation generally "should be treated as minimal," Trbovich v. United Mine Workers, 404 U.S. 528 , 538 n. 10, 92 S.Ct. 630 , 30 L.Ed.2d 686 (1972), this requirement "cannot be treated as so minimal as to write the requirement completely out of the rule." Bush v. Viterna, 740 F.2d 350, 355 (5th Cir.1984). ¶ 21 Under the doctrine of parens patriae, "a stat…

The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed. 14 Conceding, perhaps too readily, that the statement in New Jersey v. New York, 345 U.S. 369, 373 , 73 S.Ct. 689, 691 , 97 L.Ed. 1081 (1953) (per curiam), that an intervenor whose state is already a party must demonstrate “some compelling interest in his own right, apart from his interest in a class with all other citizens and creatures of the state, which interest is not properly represented by the state,” is limi…

The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed. 14 Conceding, perhaps too readily, that the statement in New Jersey v. New York, 345 U.S. 369, 373 , 73 S.Ct. 689, 691 , 97 L.Ed. 1081 (1953) (per curiam), that an intervenor whose state is already a party must demonstrate "some compelling interest in his own right, apart from his interest in a class with all other citizens and creatures of the state, which interest is not properly represented by the state," is limi…

In some courts, when a citizen or subdivision of a state seeks to intervene in a case in a district court in which the state is already a party as parens patriae, “[a] minimal showing that the representation may be inadequate is not sufficient.” Higginson, 631 F.2d at 740, cited in Olin Corp., 606 F.Supp. at 1307 .

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 470 (D.C.Cir.1979); 3B MOORE’S FEDERAL PRACTICE, ¶ 24.07[4] at 24-72. [T]o intervene in a suit in district court in which a state is already a party, a citizen ... of that state must overcome this presumption of adequate representation.

Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 739 (D.C.Cir.1979).

Under the parens patriae doctrine, “a state that is a party to a suit involving a matter of sovereign interest is presumed to represent the interests of all its citizens.” Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979) (per curiam).

See id. at 984 ; Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979).

In Higginson, 631 F.2d at 740 (footnotes omitted), the court set out the standard for intervention when the state is a party as follows: An individual seeking intervention ordinarily is required to make only a minimal showing that representation of his interest may be inadequate.

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 760 (D.C.

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979).

Courts are in agreement that “in the absence of a very compelling showing to the contrary, it will be assumed that ... a state adequately represents the interest of its citizens, and that a school board adequately represents the patrons of a school.” 7A Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1919 at 528-529 (1972), Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 674 F.2d 970 (3d Cir.1982); Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2…

See Environmental Defense Fund v. Higginson, 631 F.2d at 740 . 56 We note, moreover, that this is not a case where, despite the difference in the interests of State Farm and the District, the District's representation of the general public interest would nonetheless lead the District to make the same legal arguments that State Farm would make.

See Environmental Defense Fund v. Higginson, 631 F.2d at 740 .

See note 5, supra 7 See Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.Cir.1979) (where governmental parties already present in case, private parties must make more than a minimal showing of inadequate representation) 8 18 C.F.R. § 1.8 (1982) provides in part: (b) Who may petition.

Id. at 1000 ; see also Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738 (D.C.Cir.1979) (applying presumption of adequate representation where water districts seeking intervention, like existing governmental parties, sought to avoid requirement that federal officials prepare an environmental impact statement analyzing federal water resource projects); Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Rizzo, 530 F.2d 501, 505 (3d Cir.) (presumption of adequate representation of citiz…

Id. at 1000 ; see also Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738 (D.C.Cir.1979) (applying presumption of adequate representation where water districts seeking intervention, like existing governmental parties, sought to avoid requirement that federal officials prepare an environmental impact statement analyzing federal water resource projects); Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Rizzo, 530 F.2d 501, 505 (3d Cir.) (presumption of adequate representation of citiz…

See, e.g., Environmental Defense Fund v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738 , 740 (D.C.Cir.1979) (per curiam)

See, e.g., Environmental Defense Fund v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738 , 740 (D.C.Cir.1979) (per curiam).

See Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Higginson, 631 F.2d 738, 740 (D.C.