Today a Federal Judge in New Orleans held that the Federal government was liable for damageto many Katrina victims. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the
Army Corps of Engineers’ failure to properly maintain a navigation channel
led to Hurricane Katrina’s massive flooding of the Gulf Coast in 2005.
U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval sided with five residents and one business who argued the Army Corps’ shoddy oversight of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet led to the flooding of New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward and neighboring St. Bernard Parish. He said, however, the corps couldn’t be held liable for the flooding of eastern New Orleans, where one of the plaintiffs lived. Duval awarded the plaintiffs $720,000, or about $170,000 each, but the decision could eventually make the government vulnerable to a much larger payout. The ruling should give more than 100,000 other individuals, businesses and government entities a better shot at claiming billions of dollars in damages. Joe Bruno, one of the lead plaintiffs lawyer, said the ruling underscored the Army Corps’ long history of failure to properly protect the New Orleans region. “It’s high time we look at the way these guys do business and do a full re-evaluation of the way it does business,” Bruno said. The corps referred calls seeking comment to the Justice Department. The corps had argued that it is immune from liability because the channel is part of New Orleans’ flood control system, but the judge allowed the case to go forward. Many in New Orleans have argued that Katrina, which struck the region Aug. 29, 2005, was a manmade disaster caused by the Army Corps’ failure to maintain the levee system protecting the city. The Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet is a shipping channel dug in the 1960s as a short-cut between the Gulf of Mexico and New Orleans. This could cost U.S. taxpayers trillions of dollars. It makes
the cost of the stimulus programs look like small potatoes.
It would seem certain that the Justice Department will appeal this
decision on the grounds that the Federal Government has no liability
when acting in this governmental capacity, but in any event the
damages were caused by Hurricane Katrina.
This Federal District Judge held otherwise after the Justice Department
raised these issues.
What the Katrina Plaintiffs Say. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit heard this week, in federal court in New Orleans, brought by six New Orleans and St. Bernard Parish residents. They were not blaming the government for the hurricane, but are arguing that the government improperly designed and constructed a channel called the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, which they claim made Katrina’s flood damage much worse in areas adjacent to the channel after the storm hit. The Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, known locally as “MR-GO”, is a 76-mile-long channel between New Orleans and the Gulf of Mexico, built by the Army Corps of Engineers in 1968, to facilitate shipping in the area. What the Government Says. The federal government offered a number of arguments against its liability for damages caused by Katrina, including the position that the Flood Control Act of 1928 shields the federal government from lawsuits over flood damage. Additionally, the “government argued that Hurricane Katrina would have devastated the region whether or not the channel had ever been dug,” because of overriding factors like a failed levee system. What’s at Stake. The claims of five plaintiffs in the case succeed, the real story will be the court action that follows, with thousands of Katrina victims whose homes are (or were) located along the MR-GO expected to collect compensation as well. The District Court found that hurricane Katrina was a given. That the damage these plaintiffs suffered would not have occurred if the Army Corp of Engineers had done their work properly. Many of the victims who lost everything during Katrina have moved from this area. Many are poverty victims who can not afford to hire counsel. We will see whether plaintiff lawyers who take these cases for a share of the verdict, can find and represent many of these poor victims. With the prospect of huge verdicts, the search is probably on right now. |
||||||||||||||
Thursday, November 19, 2009
No Comments »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI