...
首页> 外文期刊>Environment reporter - Cases >Blue Water Balt. v. Pruitt
【24h】

Blue Water Balt. v. Pruitt

机译:蓝色的水波。 v。普鲁特

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes it erred in dismissing the plaintiffs' Complaint with prejudice because a dismissal on mootness grounds should be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b). Further, the Court concludes that permitting the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint challenging the Maryland Integrated Report currently in effect is not futile because it will cure the jurisdic-tional deficiencies that doomed its original Complaint, there has been no undue delay on the part of the plaintiffs in seeking to file the amended complaint, and the EPA will not be unduly prejudiced by the filing of the amended complaint. Accordingly, the Court must grant the plaintiffs' motion to alter or amend the judgment and their motion for leave to file an amended complaint. The plaintiffs, however, must file an amended complaint challenging the 2016 Integrated Report, as that is the Integrated Report that is now in force. See Gov't's Notice at 1.
机译:出于上述原因,法院得出结论认为,在有偏见的情况下驳回原告的投诉是错误的,因为根据《规则》第41条(b)款应以无争议的理由驳回驳回意见。此外,法院的结论是,允许原告提出修改的申诉以质疑当前生效的《马里兰州综合报告》并不是徒劳的,因为它将解决注定了其原始投诉的司法管辖权方面的缺陷,因此,原告方没有过分拖延原告试图提出修改后的投诉,而EPA也不会因提交修改后的投诉而受到不适当的损害。因此,法院必须准许原告更改或修改判决的动议,以及准许其提出经修正的申诉的动议。但是,原告必须提出经修订的申诉,对《 2016年综合报告》提出异议,因为这是目前生效的《综合报告》。请参阅第1页的“政府通知”。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Environment reporter - Cases》 |2018年第15期|2144-2149|共6页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号