36 C.F.R. § 228.14
Appeals
Appeal of decisions of an authorized officer made pursuant to this subpart is governed by 36 CFR part 214 or 215.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1984–1990 · leading case: United States v. Rory Doremus & David Doremus, 888 F.2d 630 (9th Cir. 1989).
United States v. Rory Doremus & David Doremus, 888 F.2d 630 (9th Cir. 1989). “If the appellants were unsatisfied with the conditions of the plan, they could have appealed to the Regional Forester under 36 C.F.R. § 228.14 (1987). His decision would then be subject to review under the *633 Administrative Procedure Act.”
United States v. Ernest L. Brunskill & Evelyn B. Brunskill, 792 F.2d 938 (9th Cir. 1986). “The Brunskills did not appeal the Forest Service’s rejection of their proposed operating plan under the provisions of 36 C.F.R. § 228.14 . We therefore do not have before us the question of whether the Forest Service had the power to reject the plan 2 or whether its reason for…”
United States v. Langley, 587 F. Supp. 1258 (E.D. Cal. 1984). “36 CFR 228.14 sets forth the procedure for appeal from decisions of authorized forest service officers.”
United States v. Hall, 751 F. Supp. 1380 (E.D. Cal. 1990). “6 The regulations allow for an appeal of a Forest decision, 36 CFR 228.14 incorporating the appeal procedures set at 36 CFR Part 251, Subpart C; however, an appeal after the fact is quite different from notice and a meaningful hearing before one is deprived of a property right.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.