Supreme Court rules against local firm
Lawyer Blogs
A Lapeer County gravel operation lost out to the federal government on Tuesday in a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that could influence thousands of similar cases.
In a 7-2 ruling, the justices said Metamora-based John R. Sand & Gravel Co. waited too long to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for property it seized as a Superfund cleanup site.
Justice Stephen Breyer said a federal appeals court was correct in raising the deadline question without being asked to do so by either party, and to rule that the company missed the deadline.
In some instances, such as lawsuits against the government, the Supreme Court "has often read the time limits ... as more absolute," Breyer wrote.
Justice John Paul Stevens dissented, saying the majority's decision "has a hollow ring" because the court previously had overturned a precedent that it relied on for Tuesday's decision.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Stevens in dissent.
"We're very disappointed in this ruling," said Jeff Haynes, a Bloomfield Hills attorney who represented the gravel company.
The decision ends the company's chances to collect any compensation from the EPA and will prompt other claimants to sue "early and often" to avoid a similar fate, Haynes said.
John R. sued the EPA in 2002 after the agency permanently fenced off 40 acres of land the company was leasing from a property owner.
Some of the seized property had been used as a municipal dump until about 1980 and was considered a hazardous waste site, although a portion contained clean sand and gravel, Haynes said.
The case initially was filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which hears claims involving the taking of private property without fair compensation.
The high court reviewed an appeal panel's finding that the John R. suit was barred by the six-year statue of limitations.
The EPA originally agreed that the case had been filed in a timely manner and didn't raise the statute of limitations issue, Haynes said.
But companies hired to clean up landfills intervened as friends of the court and raised the jurisdictional question, he said.
The appeals panel and the Supreme Court held that the clock started running when the EPA began erecting a series of temporary fences -- not when it permanently seized the 40 acres, Haynes said.
The effect of the high court's ruling is that judges at each step in the process will have to rule on time-limit issues in cases brought for money damages against the government, he said.
And anyone who wants to sue the federal government for taking private property without compensation will have to bring their claim as early as possible or risk having it tossed out, he said.
"We'll have a lot more needless lawsuits because property owners are going to have to protect their rights," Haynes said.
The Supreme Court didn't consider whether John R. was entitled to compensation by the EPA.
Haynes said the company valued the confiscated land at $8 million, while the EPA valued it at $250,000.
Related listings
-
High Court to Announce Opinions Tuesday
Lawyer Blogs 01/08/2008Several Supreme Court justices indicated yesterday that it may be difficult for them to definitely answer whether or when lethal injections violate the Constitution's protection from cruel and unusual punishment. The morning arguments before the cour...
-
Navy must cut sonar use off California
Lawyer Blogs 01/04/2008[##_1L|1369262445.jpg|width="130" height="132" alt=""|_##]A federal judge in Los Angeles on Thursday ordered the toughest set of restrictions ever imposed on the U.S. Navy's use of mid-frequency sonar off the Southern California coast as part of a pr...
-
Fla.: Feds Approve Gambling Agreement
Lawyer Blogs 01/03/2008[##_1L|1357596574.jpg|width="120" height="93" alt=""|_##]Federal authorities approved an agreement between Gov. Charlie Crist and the Seminole Tribe that allows expanded gambling at the tribe's casinos in exchange for payments to the state, officials...

New York Commercial Litigation Law Firm - Woods Lonergan PLLC
Founded in 1993 by Managing Partner James F. Woods, Woods Lonergan PLLC has built a strong reputation as a resourceful and industrious firm that provides clients with clear, concise, and straightforward answers to their most challenging legal issues. Partner Lawrence R. Lonergan, who joined the firm in 2008, has been a friend and colleague to Mr. Woods for over 40 years and shares the same business philosophy. Woods Lonergan PLLC’s collective experience and expertise enables the firm to expeditiously and effectively analyze the increasing challenges clients face in an evolving business and legal world, in many instances, avoiding unnecessary time and expense to our clients. Our mission is simple: provide cutting-edge expertise and sound advice in select areas of the law for corporate and business clients. We thrive on providing each client with personalized attention, forceful representation, and a collaborative team effort that embraces collective knowledge.