Anti-Hunting group loses lawsuit BUT still gets paid!!!

[barry]

In case you have not heard, the U.S. economy is slow and federal dollars are scare. Tax dollars are being very closely watched under public scrutiny. Now, there are less of those tax dollars to watch thanks to the former Fund for Animals, alias Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

Back in 2003, the Fund for Animals (this group merged with and is now HSUS) sued the U.S. Department of Interior and its director Steve Williams, plus former director Dale Hall. The charge: that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act. These charges targeted the USFWS ruling that permitted hunting on 39 units of the National Wildlife Refuge system, and the lawsuit covered periods ranging from 1998 through 2003.

At great expense, the USFWS reviewed and update the NEPA status and findings on those 39 refuges and an additional 21 NWRs that expanded during the five-year period. On April 13, 2011, a federal judge ruled that the USFWS new information met the criteria and hunting could continue on the listed NWRs. HSUS lost its lawsuit. Then, however, HSUS filed on July 12, 2011 for "an award of a portion of the attorney's fees and costs."

The result: the USFWS must pay the defeated HSUS $116,000.00 dollars. Can you say fleecing or milking the system?

The bottom line: though the HSUS lost and was defeated by the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, the U.S. Department of Interior, and other groups in this 8-year lawsuit and hunting remains open on the refuges, the HSUS gets $116,000 for simply suing.

As you can clearly see and read, lawsuits are profitable for some groups. Spread the word

[Turkey Trot]

I don't like NEPA and I don't like the result, but the facts are being parsed.  Fees pertaining to a NEPA suit are recovered under the Equal Access To Justice Act.  The party only gets fees to the extent they prevail in litigation.  If they forced USFWS to revised studies, they elicited an admission that they were not doing it right and served as a catalyst for USFWS to come into compliance with the law.  That is interpreted as prevailing.

Congress should change the law and and suspend fee awards under EAJA and acts that provide alternate provisions for recovery, like the Endangered Species Act.  Cut back on fees and it will make it harder for the enviro groups to shut every thing down that they don't like by tying it up in litigation.  I also believe that the scope of NEPA should be curtailed and the citizen's suit provision be eliminated, along with that in the ESA. 

[Old Gobbler]

I don't like NEPA and I don't like the result, but the facts are being parsed.  Fees pertaining to a NEPA suit are recovered under the Equal Access To Justice Act.  The party only gets fees to the extent they prevail in litigation.  If they forced USFWS to revised studies, they elicited an admission that they were not doing it right and served as a catalyst for USFWS to come into compliance with the law.  That is interpreted as prevailing.

Congress should change the law and and suspend fee awards under EAJA and acts that provide alternate provisions for recovery, like the Endangered Species Act.  Cut back on fees and it will make it harder for the enviro groups to shut every thing down that they don't like by tying it up in litigation.  I also believe that the scope of NEPA should be curtailed and the citizen's suit provision be eliminated, along with that in the ESA. 

Yeah ! what he said 

[Turkey Trot]

Coincidentally, I came across a Boone And Crockett show on TV today and they were talking about ESA and EAJA.  B&C is pushing an act named the Govt Litigation Savings Act.  Read more about it here:

http://www.boone-crockett.org/news/news_dc.asp?area=news#161

Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation Briefs Congress on Government Litigation Savings Act
July 13, 2011
Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation
The Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation (CSF), in conjunction with the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus (CSC) and Boone and Crockett Club, today briefed members of the CSC on legislation that would prevent abuse of the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) by large environmental groups and others who have exploited a loop hole in EAJA, and through round-robin litigation financially supported their organizations and built large internal legal departments to sustain and perpetuate continuing litigation.

The Government Litigation Savings Act, or H.R. 1996, introduced by CSC Rep. Cynthia Lummis and S.1061, introduced by CSC Sen. John Barasso, would reduce taxpayer's burden to pay for attorney's fees, and returns EAJA to its original intent by instituting targeted reforms on who is eligible to receive EAJA reimbursements, limiting repeated lawsuits, and reinstating tracking and reporting requirements to make EAJA more transparent.

EAJA was passed in 1980 and gave a blank check to federal agencies and the Department of Justice to reimburse people for their attorney's fees when they have sued the government, or defended against a wrongful government action. EAJA served its purpose reasonably well throughout the 1980s, but began a downward spiral in 1995 when all tracking and reporting of these payments stopped.

"Today our goal was to educate CSC members on how EAJA has been hijacked and how this negatively affects the hunting and angling community," said CSF President Jeff Crane.

"We are also looking to generate more support in Congress for these bills that would return EAJA to its original intent and keep frivolous environmental lawsuits from tying up fish and wildlife management in court."

CSC House Co-Chair Rep. Jeff Miller and Vice-Chair Rep. Heath Shuler welcomed attendees while Sen. Barasso, Rep. Lummis along with Lowell Baier, President Emeritus of Boone and Crockett Club spoke on the need to revise the EAJA through H.R. 1996 and S.1061, respectively.

"When the government stopped tracking EAJA payments in 1995, it was a dream come true for radical environmental groups. Lack of oversight has fueled the fire for these groups to grind the work of land management and other federal agencies to a halt -- and it does so on the taxpayer's dime. Americans have unwittingly funded these obstructionist political agendas for far too long at the expense of individuals, small businesses, energy producers, farmers and ranchers who must pay out of their own pocket to defend the federal government against relentless litigation," Lummis said. "This common sense legislation would help restore integrity to EAJA and return the program to the original intent of Congress."

"For far too long, special interest groups have funded their anti-multiple use agenda with Americans' hard earned taxpayer dollars," said Barrasso. "It's absolutely absurd that Washington pays outside groups to repeatedly sue our government. It's time to halt the endless cycle of reckless lawsuits and fix this broken system. Our bill will protect taxpayer dollars and restore accountability and transparency."

[Dylan T]

HSUS didn't get the money. Lawyers did.

Can I say that again? Lawyers!

[Turkey Trot]

HSUS didn't get the money. Lawyers did.

Can I say that again? Lawyers!

So everyone on the internet is a legal expert?

Lawyers are not parties to cases and they have no claims in the case.  The claim for attorneys' fees belongs to the prevailing party, and the award of fees is made to the party.

[Dylan T]

Who in turn, get the fees.