Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Martha M. Menzel, et al., Appellants,andbarbara G. Racine, et al., Plaintiffs, v. County Utilities Corporation, Appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. - 718 F.2d 120
Sept. 28, 1983
ORDER
Upon consideration of the appellee's petition for rehearing, 712 F.2d 91, the appellant's responses, and other related submissions, the court observes that by their several submissions, including a motion by appellant to supplement the record, the parties have sought to raise matters for first instance consideration by this court that have not been presented to the district court, were not presented in the briefs of the parties in their original briefs on this appeal, and that may, if relevant, be presented to the district court on the remand previously ordered by this court. In particular the court observes that the appellee has sought to have this court consider the effect of 40 C.F.R. Sec. 122.5, Virginia regulation No. 6, Sec. 6.20, and 5 U.S.C. Sec. 558(c) upon the continuation in effect of the NPDES permit centrally in issue in this case.
The court expressly declines to address these matters, noting that this is without prejudice to their consideration upon remand, to the extent they may then be shown to have relevance to the issues remanded for further consideration.
It is therefore ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the appellee's petition for rehearing is DENIED; the appellant's motion to supplement the record is DENIED; and the appellant's motion for an award of costs and attorneys' fees incurred in responding to appellee's petition for rehearing is DENIED, but without prejudice to its reconsideration upon final determination of this action.
Entered at the direction of Circuit Judge PHILLIPS with the concurrence of Circuit Judge HALL and Senior Circuit Judge BUTZNER.