36 C.F.R. § 51.85

What assignments require the approval of the Director?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The concessioner may not assign, sell, convey, grant, contract for, or otherwise transfer (such transactions collectively referred to as “assignments” for purposes of this part), without the prior written approval of the Director, any of the following:

(a) Any concession contract;

(b) Any rights to operate under or manage the performance of a concession contract as a subconcessioner or otherwise;

(d) Any leasehold surrender interest or possessory interest obtained under a concession contract.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2001–2017 · leading case: Amfac Resorts, L.L.C. v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 282 F.3d 818 (D.C. Cir. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Amfac Resorts, L.L.C. v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 282 F.3d 818 (D.C. Cir. 2002). “f the regulations states: The concessioner may not assign, sell, convey, grant, contract for, or otherwise transfer (such transactions collectively referred to as “assignments” for purposes of this part), without the prior written approval of the Director, any of the following:…”

Nat'l Mall Tours of Washington, Inc. v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 862 F.3d 35 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “In particular, it points to the fact that Park Service regulations require the agency to pre-approve certain changes in ownership effectuated by existing concession-ers, 36 C.F.R. § 51.85 (c), and failure to obtain the agency’s assent constitutes a material breach of a…”

Amfac Resorts, L.L.C. v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 142 F. Supp. 2d 54 (D.D.C. 2001). · cites it 3× “36 C.F.R. § 51.85 . The plaintiffs specifically argue that the 1998 Act gives the defendants no permission to approve or disapprove of any transfer of a controlling interest of a concessioner.”

Amfac Resorts, LLC v. Us Dept. of Interior, 142 F. Supp. 2d 54 (D.D.C. 2001). · cites it 3× “36 C.F.R. § 51.85 . The plaintiffs specifically argue that the 1998 Act gives the defendants no permission to approve or disapprove of any transfer of a controlling interest of a concessioner.”

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.