Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms

Docket No.: 09-475
Certiorari Granted: February 25, 2010
Argued: April 27, 2010
Decided: June 21, 2010

Topics:

Administrative Procedure, Article I, Clean Water, Clean Water Act, EPA, Endangered Species Act of 1973, Natural Resources, abuse of discretion, judicial review, preliminary injunction, property rights

PartyNames: Monsanto Company, et al. v. Geertson Seed Farms, et al.
Petitioner: Monsanto Company, et al.
Respondent: Geertson Seed Farms, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: 570 F.3d 1130
Supreme Court Docket

Monsanto Company, et al.
v.
Geertson Seed Farms, et al.
Background:

:flOmega In this case, after finding a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), the district court imposed, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed, a permanent nationwide injunction against any further planting of a valuable geneticallyengineered crop, despite overwhelming evidence that less restrictive measures proposed by an expert federal agency would eliminate any non~trivial risk of harm.

Question Presented:

flOmega 1. Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that NEPA plaintiffs are specially exempt from the requirement of showing a likelihood of irreparable harm to obtain an injunction. flOmega 2. Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that a district court may enter an injunction sought to remedy a NEPA violation without conducting an evidentiary hearing sought by a party to resolve genuinely disputed facts directly relevant to the appropriate scope of the requested injunction. flOmega 3. Whether the Ninth Circuit erred when it affirmed a nationwide injunction entered prior to this Court's decision in Winter v. NRDC, 129 S. Ct. 365 (2008), which sought to remedy a NEPA violation based on only a remote possibility of reparable harm.

Question:

1) Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that the plaintiffs are exempt from showing a "likelihood of irreparable harm" to obtain an injunction? 2) Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that a district court may enter an injunction without conducting an evidentiary hearing?

Note:

EXPEDITED BRIEFING SCHEDULE. JUSTICE BREYER TOOK NO PART.

Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms
ORAL ARGUMENT

April 27, 2010

Holding: reversed and remanded
Vote: 7-1
Recused: J.,
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)