Yourlawyer.com (Levee Failure News)

First MRGO Hurricane Katrina Flood Trial A Big Win For Plaintiffs

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0800

A major Hurricane Katrina flooding trial ended with a win for plaintiffs yesterday, as a federal judge ruled that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' failure to properly maintain the Mississippi River Gulf Coast Outlet (known popularly as MRGO) was partly to blame for the flooding that followed the historic storm.

Judge Stanwood R. Duval, Jr's. landmark decision awarded over $719,000 to four different sets of plaintiffs. However, the ruling could set a precedent for over 400,000 other residents of New Orleans and St. Bernard parish who have filed similar damage claims against the Corps.

MRGO was built to allow ships easier access between New Orleans and the Gulf of Mexico. In order to build it, the Army Corps of Engineers cut through 76 miles of swamp and wetlands that had once served to protect the Crescent City from destructive storm surges, like the one that accompanied Katrina. Flood victims had claimed that during the storm, the MRGO acted as a funnel, and pulled much of Katrina’s storm surge into the New Orleans and St. Bernard.

The Corps had argued that the federal Flood Control Act shielded the government from liability for defective flood-control projects. But Judge Duval did not agree, ruling that the Corps was not protected from liability in the case of MRGO because it was built for navigation, not flood control.

Judge Duval said the Army engineers are liable for the “negligent operation and maintenance” of the canal and not for faulty design or construction. “When the corps designed the MRGO, it recognized that foreshore protection was going to be needed, yet the corps did nothing to monitor the problem in a meaningful way," he wrote in a 156-page opinion.

According to Bloomberg.com the judge had said at the trial's start that his finding would be used as a guide for other claims. An attorney for other MRGO plaintiffs said lawyers will be seeking a global settlement with the U.S. to cover residents and businesses in New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, east New Orleans and St. Bernard Parish.

Following Katrina, the U.S. Congress ordered the closure of MRGO, and it was officially closed to boat traffic in April.

Impact of Mr. GO At Center of Landmark Hurricane Katrina Trial

Tue, 21 Apr 2009 00:00:00 -0700

A landmark trial to determine the governments' liability for Hurricane Katrina flooding began this week in federal court in New Orleans. The lawsuit blames the Army Corps of Engineers for much of the destructive flooding that occurred in New Orleans during the historic storm. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit - six hurricane survivors - claim the Corps was negligent in building and maintaining the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet, allowing Katrina’s storm surge to flood parts of New Orleans and St. Bernard Parish through that waterway.

Nicknamed Mr. GO, the Mississippi Gulf Outlet was built to allow ships easier access between New Orleans and the Gulf of Mexico. In order to build it, the Army Corps of Engineers cut through 76 miles of swamp and wetlands that had once served to protect the Crescent City from destructive storm surges, like the one that accompanied Katrina. In addition, critics of Mr. GO claim that during the storm, the waterway acted as a funnel, and pulled much of Katrina's storm surge into the city.

The Army Corp. had argued that that federal law gives it immunity from lawsuits - a concept called sovereign immunity - and that it properly maintained the waterway. But last month, a federal judge rejected that argument, writing that there were “substantial questions of fact with respect to the actions and inactions that followed the creation of the channel”.

According to ABC News, the Corps is now arguing that federal Flood Control Act shields the government from liability for defective flood-control projects. A legal brief filed by attorneys representing the government also claims the Corps. can't be sued for acting with reasonable care or making a judgment call. The feds also claim that there was nothing defective about Mr. GO, and that there was nothing that could have been done to it that would have lessened Katrina's destruction.

For their part, the plaintiff's claim that because Mr. GO is a navigational waterway, not a flood control project, the Flood Control Act does not relieve the Army Corps of responsibility. The Corps also ignored federal law by failing to inform Congress of the environmental damage caused by the building of Mr. GO, the lawsuit claims.

According to the New York Times, in yesterday's opening session the plaintiffs’ expert witness on geology and the coastal environment, Sherwood M. Gagliano, cited reports from as early as 1957 that claimed the canal would pose a danger to the people of St. Bernard Parish and reports of his own dating from 1972 that warned of the increased flooding risk from wetlands destruction. He also testified that the Corps was aware of such research and even prepared a report in 1988 that mentioned “the possibility of catastrophic damage to urban areas” from Mr. Go. But in spite of such assessments, Gagliano asserted that the Corps did little to reduce the risk.

The outcome of this trial could have huge implications. According to The New York Times, the government has said damages in the suit could reach $100 billion - making it the largest judgment in U.S. history. If the plaintiffs are successful, it would open the door to more litigation, as more than 400,000 similar complaints have been filed against the Corps, the Times said.

According to The New York Times, the trial is expected to last four weeks. It is a non-jury trial, meaning that federal judge, Stanwood R. Duval Jr. will decide the verdict.

Since Hurricane Katrina, Congress has ordered the closure of Mr. GO. In fact, it will be officially closed to boat traffic tomorrow. According to theadvocate.com, the Army Corps of Engineers is building a rock closure on the channel which will consist of 433,500 tons of rocks piled 450 feet wide at the bottom of the structure and 12 feet across at the top.

Katrina Lawsuit Against Army Corps of Engineers Will Proceed

Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:00:00 -0700

A U.S. District Court Judge has ruled that a group of Louisiana residents whose homes were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina can proceed with a lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. According to the Associated Press, the lawsuit claims the Corps is responsible for the homes' destruction because it failed to maintain a levy along the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet, allowing Katrina's storm surge to flood parts of New Orleans and St. Bernard Parish through that waterway.

The Hurricane Katrina lawsuit is now scheduled for trial beginning April 20. According to the Associated Press, the case will be watched by thousands of other Hurricane Katrina victims who also blame the Army Corps of Engineers for the loss of their homes.

The Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet serves as a shortcut for ships from the Mississippi River heading to the Gulf of Mexico. When it was built, it cut into the Louisiana swamps. Critics of the outlet claim it destroyed wetlands, marsh and swamp forests that had served as natural flood controls, and were effective at slowing surges from storms like Katrina.

The federal government has tried on three occasions to have the lawsuit, known as Robinson vs. United States, dismissed, the Associated Press said. This time, the Corps argued that federal law gives it immunity from lawsuits - a concept called sovereign immunity - and that it properly maintained the waterway.

But U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval dismissed that argument, writing that there were “substantial questions of fact with respect to the actions and inactions that followed the creation of the channel".

According to the Associated Press, Judge Duval had already dismissed a class-action lawsuit against the Army Corps over the breaching of New Orleans' 17th Street Canal during Katrina. The judge ruled that the corps was immune in that case under the Flood Control Act of 1928. That act grants immunity to the federal government when flood control projects fail.

But the lawsuit involving the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet does not focus on the channel's flood controls. Instead, Judge Duval said that a trial is required on the issue of whether the Corps failed to take the risk of flooding from the outlet seriously after it dug the channel, the Associated Press said. The Corps argued that it "relied on studies that the widening of the channel and loss of wetlands would not have an effect on the people and property in the area," Duval said. "The question is whether the reliance on these studies was negligent or not."

According to The New York Times, the government has said damages in the suit could reach $100 billion - making it the largest in U.S. history. If the plaintiffs are successful, it would open the door to more litigation, as more than 400,000 similar complaints have been filed against the Corps, the Times said.

Hurricane Katrina Levee Failure Victims Seek Billions from Army Corps of Engineers

Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:00:00 -0800

Hurricane Katrina lawsuits filed against the Army Corps of Engineers could cost the Corps big. So far, just shy of a half million claims have been filed against the Army Corps of Engineers for the damages caused by the breeching of levees it maintained in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. Of those, 247 are seeking damages of $1 billion or more, and one claimant is seeking more than $3 quadrillion from the Army Corps of Engineers over its poorly maintained levees.

On June 1, 2006, the Army Corps of Engineers took responsibility for the flooding in New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina. A 6,000 page-plus report on the tragedy, prepared by the 150-member Interagency Performance Evaluation Task Force assembled and headed by the Corps, said the flooding was a result of failed levees which were built in a disjointed fashion using outdated methods. The report concluded that the levees were inconsistent in quality, materials and design and that the inconsistencies left gaps that were exploited by the storm. Engineers did not take into account the poor soil quality underneath New Orleans, the report said, and their failure to account for the sinking of land caused some sections to be as much as two feet lower than other parts. The report also blamed four breaches in canals that run through New Orleans on foundation failures that were not considered in the original design of these structures. These breaches caused two-thirds of the flooding in New Orleans.

Since then, thousands of lawsuits have been filed against the Corps for the tremendous damage brought on by the levee failures that caused the flooding of New Orleans. Katrina, which is blamed for more than 1,600 deaths in Louisiana and Mississippi, is considered the most destructive storm to ever hit the U.S. It caused at least $60 billion in insured losses and could cost Gulf Coast states up to $125 billion, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Earlier this week, the Army Corps of Engineers released a list of the 247 Hurricane Katrina claims seeking damages of $1 billion or more. Most claims were filed by individuals. Fourteen of them included compensation requests for "wrongful deaths." The list includes a $77 billion claim filed by the city of New Orleans, as well as three claims by unnamed insurance companies.

By far the largest levee failure claim was one for $3 quadrillion filed by a resident of Baker, Louisiana. Although Baker is far from any of the levee breaches, many of those made homeless by Hurricane Katrina still live in temporary trailers there. It is an understatement to say that $3 quadrillion is a lot of money. Such an amount would far exceed the 2007 U.S. gross domestic product of $13.7 trillion. A stack of 1 quadrillion pennies would reach Saturn.

The extremely large damage claims are indicative of the type of damage the Hurricane Katrina levee failure left in its wake. Many victims lost everything they owned and more. In most cases, after the flooding they were left abandoned in New Orleans without food or water for days. Years later, many of have yet to put their lives back together. The huge dollar amounts that levee failure victims are seeking from the Corps are simply a reflection of the anger that many of them feel as a result of their destroyed lives.

Trial set for Katrina lawsuit against Allstate

Mon, 09 Apr 2007 00:00:00 -0700

After Hurricane Katrina demolished Robert and Merryl Weiss' home, the couple were paid hundred of thousands of dollars by their insurance company. But they say it isn't enough.

Jury selection was to start Monday in the Weisses' lawsuit against Allstate Insurance Co., only the second Katrina insurance case to be tried so far in a Louisiana federal court.

Allstate and other insurers say their policies cover a hurricane's wind but not its rising water. Hundreds of homeowners in Louisiana and Mississippi have sued their insurers for refusing to cover billions of dollars in damage from Katrina's storm surge.

The Weisses blame Katrina's winds and possibly a storm-spawned tornado for demolishing their Slidell home. But Allstate concluded that the hurricane's storm surge was responsible for most of the damage.

The couple had a federal flood insurance policy and a separate Allstate homeowner's policy with limits of $343,000 for the dwelling and $240,100 for personal property.

Allstate paid the Weisses $350,000 for coverage under their flood policy but only $29,483 for structural damage to their home and $14,787 for additional living expenses under their homeowner policy.

The Weisses, however, say at least two of their neighbors were paid the full limits of their Allstate policies after Katrina destroyed their homes. The couple accuses Allstate of bad faith for not paying their own claim in full.

In court papers, Allstate attorney Judy Barrasso accuses the couple of misrepresenting their claim by demanding that the company pay them at least $34,000 for a boathouse that Allstate says wasn't located on the insured property when Katrina hit on Aug. 29, 2005.

Northbrook, Ill.-based Allstate used the same defense tactic in February, during the first federal trial for a Louisiana homeowner's Katrina insurance suit. That trial ended abruptly when the plaintiffs dropped their lawsuit amid allegations they misrepresented their claim.

The Weisses say an Allstate adjuster told them in October 2005 that Katrina's winds destroyed their waterfront home on the north side of Lake Pontchartrain before storm surge washed away its remnants. Months later, however, the couple received a report from Allstate-contracted engineers that blamed storm surge for the home's destruction.

Rimkus Consulting Group., Inc., prepared the engineering report on the Weisses' home. One of the couple's attorneys, accused Rimkus of altering reports on storm-damaged homes so that claims could be denied and the company could generate more business with insurers.

"Rimkus engaged in a pattern of doing this," the couple's attorney said Thursday during a pretrial hearing before U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance.

Team Louisiana Report: Army Corps Responsible for Levee Failures

Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:00:00 -0700

A damning new report commissioned by the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development has found the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) grossly overestimated the ability of their levee systems to protect New Orleans in the face of strong storms. A wide range of miscalculations and oversights by the Corps, says the report, led to the failure of the levees during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In addition, the report concludes that the system today remains insufficient to protect the city against major storm surges.

The cadre of scientists and engineers, known as “Team Louisiana,” was led by Ivor van Heerden, director of the LSU Center for the Study of Public Health Impacts of Hurricanes. The highly anticipated, nearly 500-page report, offers a slew of data and evidence related to the failure of several federal levee systems, including those on the east and west banks of the Industrial Canal, east and west banks of the London Avenue Canal, the east bank of the 17th Street Canal, the north bank of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW), and the west bank of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO).

Among the criticisms of the Corps’ levee systems:

The Greater New Orleans Hurricane Protection System (GNO HPS) was not properly conceived, based on the 1965 Congressional mandate that it must defend against “the most severe combination of meteorological conditions reasonably expected.” The report said that the initial meteorological and oceanographic analysis was “known to be obsolete by 1972.” Among other miscalculations, the maximum potential sustained wind speed was underestimated by 20 percent, which scientists said could have led to a 40 percent underestimation of surge elevation levels.
The levees were built too low by a measure of one to two feet because of Corps miscalculations about New Orleans’ elevation, which actually sinks over time. The report said the Corps engineers used outdated information in the construction and failed to account for a subsidence (sinking of ground) rate of three to four feet per 100 years, a fact that had been established decades ago.
The Corps did not “follow existing engineering practice and USACE guidance for construction of levees and floodwalls.” The report claims that the Corps did not properly account for soil strength and erosion as well as underseepage.
The creation of the MRGO navigational canal compromised levee-system performance. Team Louisiana said that MRGO and the GIWW “provide efficient conduits to funnel surge into the heart of New Orleans.” They say that surge elevations were higher and rose more quickly because of these waterways.
The levee system was not properly maintained and operated “to assure the required level of protection through time.” In fact, the report says, quite bluntly: “The GNO HPS was managed like a circa 1965 flood control museum.”

Perhaps most critically, the report determined that the Hurricane Protection System “still provides a substantially lower level of protection than that originally authorized in 1965.” The report also says, “It is evidence of how pervasively under-built the system was that it has cost as much after Katrina to repair the GNO HPS to a marginally stable pre-storm condition as was spent in the previous 40 years.”

Tellingly, the authors also felt the need to add the following passage in their executive summary: “One way to look at the Katrina event is as a catastrophic natural disaster, and, with respect to the magnitude of the storm surge, it was. This approach tends, however, to minimize the engineering contribution to the direct and indirect loss of as many as 1,500 Louisiana residents.”

New Orleans residents scramble to beat deadline for filing claims over Katrina levee failure

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:00:00 -0800

Residents scrambled to beat a deadline for filing court claims against the federal government and the Army Corps of Engineers for damage resulting from the failure of levees following Hurricane Katrina.

The corps says Thursday 1½ years after the storm hit is the deadline for the Katrina litigation claims to be submitted. Roughly 30,000 residents already had filed a claim as of late last week, but Thursday's deadline surprised many others whose homes and businesses were damaged or destroyed in the flooding following the storm.

On Monday, a steady procession of people stopped by the corps' Leake Avenue office to drop off their claims in person. Charles Brown, 47, said he didn't know about the deadline until Sunday.

“A lot of people aren't going to get their claims in,” said Brown, who has been living in a government-issued trailer since his Gentilly home was damaged by the storm.

Another claimant, Janet Long, 45, used the camera in her cell phone to photograph herself inserting the form in the drop box to prove that she filed a claim on her mother's behalf.

“It's aggravating, but it's worth it,” said Long, whose mother's home in the city's Lakeview neighborhood was flooded.

While many Mississippi homeowners harmed by Katrina are suing their insurers, much of the legal wrangling in Louisiana is over whether flooding from the failed levees was manmade rather than from a natural disaster.

One of the plaintiffs' attorneys, asked a federal judge to consider postponing the filing deadline. The plaintiffs argue that federal officials were reneging on an agreement to let claimants file until Aug. 29, 2007, the two-year anniversary.

“There is much anguish and uncertainty among all Hurricane Katrina victims concerning their rights,” the plantiffs' attorneys wrote. U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval didn't immediately rule on the request.

Katrina Victims Win Latest Court Battles

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 00:00:00 -0800

Thousands of victims of Hurricane Katrina finally have some good news to celebrate: A U.S. District Court judge ruled yesterday that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) must resume making housing-relief payments to those displaced by the disaster. In handing down his decision, Judge Richard Leon delivered a sharp rebuke to FEMA and the Bush Administration, calling FEMA’s application process “Kafkaesque” and even unconstitutional. Earlier this week, a Louisiana judge ruled that flood victims may be eligible for further compensation from insurers than originally delegated.

In his ruling against FEMA, Judge Leon, who was appointed by President Bush, ordered the agency to immediately restore its short-term housing-relief benefits for evacuees, including the benefits they would have received over the past three months. It also requires FEMA to send out detailed, clearly worded letters of explanation with “more fulsome instructions” to those whose benefits are being denied. Previous FEMA notices were “unconstitutionally vague and uninformative,” according to Leon. In addition, FEMA must institute a fair and easy-to-understand appeals process for the victims.

“It is unfortunate, if not incredible, that FEMA and its counsel could not devise a sufficient notice system to spare these beleaguered evacuees the added burden of federal litigation to vindicate their constitutional rights,” Leon wrote.

In Monday’s ruling, U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval Jr. allowed to proceed a lawsuit brought by New Orleans homeowners against various insurance companies. Plaintiffs have cited ambiguous language in the insurers’ water-damage policies and are suing to collect further compensation for flood damage. Duval noted that the policies didn’t sufficiently differentiate between acts of God (rain) and acts of man (levees breaking). Duval’s ruling may end up costing insurers in Louisiana close to $1 billion and may open the door for further legal action against the insurance companies.

St. Bernard Parish joins MR-GO lawsuit

Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:00:00 -0700

St. Bernard Parish government leaders have long blamed the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet for the devastating flooding that swamped some 25,000 homes after Hurricane Katrina.

On Wednesday, they announced that the parish had formally joined a class-action federal lawsuit that aims to force the closure of MR-GO.
That suit, filed in July against the Army Corps of Engineers, seeks to have the shipping channel closed and also asks for the appointment of a panel to recommend methods to address any dangers posed by the channel, including rebuilding wetlands that critics say were destroyed by MR-GO.

I feel good. I feel we did the right thing," St. Bernard Parish Councilman Mark Madary said Wednesday.

A corps spokesman said the corps could not comment on pending litigation.

The class-action suit was initially filed by eight residents of St. Bernard Parish and New Orleans, including Madary and New Orleans City Councilwoman Cynthia Willard-Lewis, who represents the 9th Ward and eastern New Orleans.

The St. Bernard Parish Council last October authorized parish government to consult with lawyers regarding a lawsuit. Although some of the water entering St. Bernard Parish came from breaches in the Industrial Canal levees, parish officials contend MR-GO acted as a funnel for Hurricane Katrina's surge to swamp the parish.

Katrina's surge, estimated at more than 20 feet, poured over and through sections of the 17-foot-tall levee along the shipping canal. In previous interviews, corps representatives have said Katrina's surge was so powerful that it would have flooded the area regardless of the presence of MR-GO.

Madary said the council last week was unanimous in its decision to join the lawsuit.

"How do you justify what it's done to the people?" he asked.

Besides Madary, Williard-Lewis and the St. Bernard Parish Council, other plaintiffs in the suit are St. Bernard Parish residents Charles "Pete" Savoy, Gerald Nevle and Pam Nevle, 9th Ward resident Pam Dashiell and eastern New Orleans residents Shawn and Nga Tran.

Litigation group seeks Katrina victims

Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:00:00 -0700

Fourteen law firms,banding together as the Levee Litigation Group -urged residents of Jefferson, Orleans and St. Bernard parishes today to file forms protecting their rights to recover damages from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The litigation group, led by attorney Joe Bruno, held a press conference this morning on the steps of the Federal District Courthouse in New Orleans, where they discussed plans to sue the corps for failing to secure levees properly against flooding prompted by Hurricane Katrina a year ago.

At www.leveelaw.com, the Standard Form 95 needed to take legal action against the corps and its contractors can be downloaded and completed. Be forewarned: Completing attachments to the form could lead to retaining the litigation group as your attorney.

Other firms joining Bruno & Bruno in the suit include Lambert & Nelson, Gainsburgh Benjamin, Walter Dumas, Fayard & Honeycutt, Parker & Waichman, and deGravelles Palmintier.

New Orleans Hurricane Katrina Lawsuit Levee Failure Lawyer

Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:00:00 -0700

Levee Litigation Group Dedicated to Helping Hurricane Katrina Victims

Parker & Waichman, LLP is proud to be a part of the Levee Litigation Group, a team of leading plaintiffs lawyers that are seeking justice for thousands of victims of Hurrican Katrina. Levee Litigation Group is representing people who have been injured, lost property or lost employment as a direct result of flooding caused by levee and other barrier failures.

On June 1, 2006, the Army Corps of Engineers took responsibility for the flooding in New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina. A 6,000 page-plus report on the tragedy, prepared by the 150-member Interagency Performance Evaluation Task Force assembled and headed by the Corps, said the flooding was a result of failed levees which were built in a disjointed fashion using outdated methods. The report concluded that the levees were inconsistent in quality, materials and design and that the inconsistencies left gaps that were exploited by the storm. Engineers did not take into account the poor soil quality underneath New Orleans, the report said, and their failure to account for the sinking of land caused some sections to be as much as two feet lower than other parts. The report also blamed four breaches in canals that run through New Orleans on foundation failures that were not considered in the original design of these structures. These breaches caused two-thirds of the flooding in New Orleans.

This report followed a critical report by the Independent Levee Investigation Team which was made up of experts from the University of California at Berkeley. These investigators concluded that the devastation Katrina inflicted on New Orleans was caused by the failure of the system, calling it “unfinished” and “impotent.” The group said that floodwalls failed because they weren't built safely enough to begin with, and that some levees washed away, not because they were first overpowered by a storm surge, but because they were improperly built of sandy soils that the powerful storm surge ate through before overtopping occurred. The group was highly critical of the Army Corps of Engineers, calling them “dysfunctional” and “unreliable.” The team stated, " New Orleans flooded not so much because there was a hurricane, but because of human error, poor decisions and judgments, and failed policies.”

Levee Litigation Group Can Help You If:

You or a loved one was injured as a result of Katrina flooding
Your property was lost or damaged as a result of Katrina flooding
You lost permanently or temporarily lost employment as a result of Katrina flooding
You incurred moving costs and other relocation fees as a result of Katrina flooding.

Hurricane Katrina damaged 169 miles of the 350-mile hurricane system that protects New Orleans and was blamed for more than 1,570 deaths and $100-$200 billion in property damage in Louisiana alone. Levee Litigation Group is representing individuals who suffered physical and psychological injuries, death of family members, property damage and lost wages as a result of flood damage caused by Hurricane Katrina. For more information on Levee Litigation Group, please visit www.leveelaw.com or call 1-800-LAW-INFO (1-800-529-4636).