Opinion ID: 75949
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Ability of the Existing Parties to Represent Florida's Interest

Text: 48 The proposed intervenor has the burden of showing that the existing parties cannot adequately represent its interest, but this burden is treated as minimal. Clark v. Putnam County, 168 F.3d 458, 461 (11th Cir.1999) (quoting Trbovich v. United Mine Workers, 404 U.S. 528, 538 n. 10, 92 S.Ct. 630, 30 L.Ed.2d 686 (1972)). Florida's interest is to ensure that Georgia's actions do not deprive Florida of its equitable share of water. That interest is not represented by the Corps, which has no independent stake in how much water reaches the Apalachicola. See, e.g., Sierra Club v. Espy, 18 F.3d 1202, 1207-08 (5th Cir.1994) (finding that the government did not adequately represent the interests of timber purchasers). 49 For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the district court's denial of Florida's motion for intervention as of right, and thus need not address the issue of permissive intervention. 11