This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

DOI promulgated a regulation providing that damages for despoilment of natural resources shall be the lesser of restoration or replacement costs or diminution of use values. This regulation was challenged in that CERLA required damages to be at least sufficient to pay the cost in every case of restoring, replacing, or acquiring the equivalent of the damaged resource. Because the lost value of use could be lower than the cost of restoration, DOI's rule would result in damages too small to pay for the costs of restoration.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.