Notes of Decisions
Lyng v. Nw. Indian Cemetery Prot. Assn., 485 U.S. 439 (1988).
· cites it 2× “§§ 470f, 470h-2(f); the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, 16 U. S. C. § 470aa et seq.; the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.”
United States v. Quarrell, 310 F.3d 664 (10th Cir. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Quarrell and Michael Quarrell appeal their convictions of violating the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa et seg., and conspiring to violate ARPA pursuant to 18 U.”
Bailey v. State Ex Rel. Bd. of Tests for Alcohol & Drug Influence, 2022 OK 50, 510 P.3d 845.
· cites it 3× “2002) (when a defendant is charged with "knowingly" violating the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa et seq .), the purpose of the Act is not frustrated by defendant raising the defense based on his reasonable belief that he was lawfully excavating on…”
Nation v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 819 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2016).
“In 1979, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa–470mm (1979), added new permit requirements, and the Park Service removed an additional six sets of remains pursuant to a federal permit.”
United States v. Earl K. Shumway, 112 F.3d 1413 (10th Cir. 1997).
“16 U.S.C. § 470aa(a), (b). We agree with the district court the paltry sum of $9,122, the asserted cost of the artifact’s fair market value and cost of restoration and repair, fails to reflect adequately the extent of damage Mr.”
Crow Creek Tribe v. White, Thomas E., 331 F.3d 912 (D.C. Cir. 2003).
“(2000) (providing notification and consultation procedures federal agencies must follow prior to a federal “undertaking” to consider the undertaking’s effect on historic properties); Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), 16 U.S.C. § 470aa et seq. (2000) (providing…”
Leisnoi, Inc. v. Omar Stratman, 154 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir. 1998).
“Leisnoi had also brought claims under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. § 470aa, and the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.”
Bonnichsen v. United States, 217 F. Supp. 2d 1116 (D. Or. 2002).
“The fourth claim alleges that Defendants violated the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (ARPA), 16 USC § 470aa et seq., by failing to maintain the Kennewick Man remains “for the benefit of the American people,” failing to make the remains of the Kennewick Man available for…”
Chilkat Indian Vill. v. Johnson, 870 F.2d 1469 (9th Cir. 1989).
· cites it 2× “§ 1163 (criminal sanctions for the theft or embezzlement of Indian tribal property); 16 U.S.C. § 470aa, et seq. (protection of archaeological resources removed from tribal lands).”
United States v. Arthur J. Gerber, 999 F.2d 1112 (7th Cir. 1993).
· cites it 2× “Arthur Joseph Gerber pleaded guilty to misdemeanor violations of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa et seq., and was sentenced to twelve months in prison, reserving however his right to appeal on the ground that the Act is inapplicable to his…”
16 U.S.C. § 470aa(a): 2 cases
United States v. Earl K. Shumway, 112 F.3d 1413 (10th Cir. 1997).
“16 U.S.C. § 470aa(a), (b). We agree with the district court the paltry sum of $9,122, the asserted cost of the artifact’s fair market value and cost of restoration and repair, fails to reflect adequately the extent of damage Mr.”
16 U.S.C. § 470aa(a)(1): 1 case
United States v. Arthur J. Gerber, 999 F.2d 1112 (7th Cir. 1993).
“Arthur Joseph Gerber pleaded guilty to misdemeanor violations of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa et seq., and was sentenced to twelve months in prison, reserving however his right to appeal on the ground that the Act is inapplicable to his…”
16 U.S.C. § 470aa(a)(l): 1 case
United States v. Quarrell, 310 F.3d 664 (10th Cir. 2002).
“Quarrell and Michael Quarrell appeal their convictions of violating the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa et seg., and conspiring to violate ARPA pursuant to 18 U.”
16 U.S.C. § 470aa(b): 3 cases
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.