Case Law Details
Willis-Knighton Medical Center v. LaHood
Project Description:
This project involves the proposed extension of the Inner Loop around Shreveport/Bossier City in Louisiana. The project would extend the Inner Loop from its current endpoint at Flournoy Lucas Road to the Port of Shreveport–Bossier, approximately five miles to the south. In the 1990s, the City of Shreveport and the region’s MPO (the Northwest Louisiana Council of Governments) conducted a planning study, which considered eleven routes for the proposed extension and identified a single preferred route. In 2009, the MPO included the proposed extension in its long-range transportation plan and identified it as a high-priority project. In 2011, the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LDOTD) initiated a feasibility study for the proposed extension. Under LDOTD’s staged project development process, the feasibility study preceded the initiation of a NEPA document. At the time this lawsuit was filed, the feasibility study was still underway, and NEPA had not yet begun.
2014 WL 3543535
2014 WL 3543535
U.S. District Court – Louisiana
07/16/2014
Inner Loop Project
Highway
Case Summary
The plaintiffs filed suit against FHWA, the LADOTD, and the MPO in May 2013, seeking to challenge the ongoing feasibility study. All three defendants filed motions to dismiss the lawsuit. On July 30, 2014, the court granted the motions to dismiss the case, finding that the plaintiffs could not bring their lawsuit until the NEPA process was completed.
Key Holdings
Litigation Procedure APA- Final Agency Action. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, a plaintiff can challenge a federal agency’s decision only after the agency has taken a “final agency action.” In this case, FHWA had not completed (or even begun) the NEPA process for the project. Because the NEPA process had not been completed, the court found that there was no final agency action and thus there was no basis for a lawsuit under the APA. The plaintiffs also argued that, even if they could not sue under the APA, they should be allowed to sue directly under the CEQ regulations (23 CFR Part 1500) or the FHWA NEPA regulations (23 CFR Part 771). The court rejected those arguments, finding that the only possible basis for the lawsuit was under the APA, and the APA claims could not be filed until the NEPA process was complete. Therefore, the court dismissed the case.
File Attachment
Download the decision