Description: Action seeking damages from Army Corps of Engineers for exacerbation of flooding damage during and after Hurricane Katrina.
-
In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 05/28/2015 Opinion Download Per curiam opinion issued. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of claims against the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the United States in which homeowners sought damages under three admiralty statutes for the exacerbation of Hurricane Katrina’s effects in the New Orleans area. The court held in an unpublished opinion that the Corps’ decision on its method of dredging the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet channel was shielded from liability by the discretionary function exemption. The court rejected the homeowners’ contention that the dredging method used by the Corps for decades caused wetland erosion in violation of federal and state statutes and regulations that specifically prescribed that the Corps use methods that would protect wetlands. -
In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/20/2013 Order Download Motion to dismiss or, alternatively, for summary judgment granted. Citing the Fifth Circuit's 2012 opinion, the district court granted the government's motion to dismiss claims arising from the failure of "outfall canals" for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to the government's immunity under the Flood Control Act of 1928. The court also rejected the arguments of plaintiffs who tried to distinguish their claims arising from allegedly improper maintenance of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO) from claims that the Fifth Circuit found were subject to discretionary-function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act. The plaintiffs said their claims were different because they concerned allegedly negligently performed maintenance dredging, not foreshore protection. The district court said the Fifth Circuit had made "abundantly clear" that "whatever the United States did or did not do to address the ever-expanding width of the MRGO was subject to a policy decision and thus shield by the discretionary function." The court said the allegedly improper dredging therefore was protected. 12/20/2013 Order Download Washington Group International, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment granted. 04/12/2013 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Download Ordered that judgment be entered in favor of the the United States and Washington Group International, Inc. and against plaintiffs. The district court found that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' supervision of a remediation project executed by Washington Group International, Inc. along the East Bank Industrial Area (EBIA) did not substantially cause breaches in the EBIA floodwall. The court noted that the Corps would be absolutely immune for any improper design of the levee. The court wrote: "I feel obligated to note that the bureaucratic behemoth that is the Army Corps of Engineers is virtually unaccountable to the citizens it protects despite the Federal Tort Claims Act. The public fisc will very possibly be more jeopardized by a lack of accountability than a rare judgment granting relief. The untold billions of dollars of damage incurred by the Greater New Orleans area as a result of the [Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Protection Plan] levee failures during Katrina speak eloquently to that point." -
In re Katrina Canal Breaches Consolidated Litigation
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 09/24/2012 Opinion Download Judgments for plaintiffs reversed, and judgments for government affirmed. Although the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the district court that the government was not immune from liability under the Flood Control Act of 1928 (FCA) for claims arising from alleged negligent maintenance of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, the appellate court concluded that the discretionary-function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act shielded the government from liability in these cases. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that the government was immune under the FCA for claims of damages allegedly caused by flood waters released by negligence in flood-control activity.