The federal appeals court overturned the ruling of a lower-house court in favor of the government against a Nevada ranch owner. The ruling court also admonished the judge, who's said to have abused his power and shows personal interest against US land managers.

Yahoo News says that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals gave a pair of decisions ruled against the late Wayne Hage and his family in Tonopah. They were found guilty of letting cattle enter a federal land without proper grazing permit and should be subjected to fines.

This case has a similarity with the Cliven Bundy controversy.  Wherein there was a standoff against Bundy and the federal officials regarding grazing rights on federal lands. The government officials did not seize Bundy's cattle, but a case against him is still ongoing until now. It has been reported that the family didn't pay $1.1million worth of grazing fee and compounded penalties to the government as reported by the Wildlife News.

The court also found out that US District Judge Robert Clive Jones, had no legal and valid reasons to find the employees of the Bureau of Land management and Forest Service in contempt of court for performing their duties.

According to ABC News, the court of appeals establish that the defendants had willingly trespassed the land owned by the government. They said that it is required for cattle owners to obtain a grazing permit before allowing any cattle to feed on public lands. It was Judge Jones who ordered two federal agencies to issue a grazing permit in favor of the Hages. He also ordered that permission should be obtained from his court before any future trespass notice shall be given to the Hages.

A contempt of court was filed against Thomas Seley of the Bureau of Land Management and Steven Williams of the Forest Service by Judge Jones for continuing to issue the rancher a notice compliance. But the 9th Circuit Court addressed the matter in a four-page memorandum stating that Jones grossly abused the authority given to him by holding the two officials in contempt of court for doing conventional, lawful actions that had no influence to the case proper.