The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit [official website] on Friday affirmed [opinion, PDF] the dismissal of a case filed by the Board of Commissioners of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority [official website] against 97 defendants involved in the exploration and production of oil reserves, alleging their activities increased the risk of flooding in the region. The board had requested that the case be remanded to the state court and that the district court’s granting a motion of dismissal be reversed. The motion to remand to state court was denied because the case was found to be under federal jurisdiction. The board alleged that the defendants’ dredging activity has resulted in coastal land loss, which has increased the risk of flooding due to storm surges. The board states that they have undertaken or will have to undertake “highly costly but remedial remedies” to protect the area from the increased risk of storm surges. The board sued for negligence, strict liability, natural servitude of drain, public nuisance, private nuisance, and breach of contract as to third-party beneficiaries. The court ruled that the board failed to adequately show the defendants owed a duty, resulting in the dismissal of the negligence and strict liability claims. The natural servitude claim was dismissed due to lake of supporting facts given by the board. The nuisance claims were dismissed because the board failed to adequately show by fact that the activity in the defendants’ property has caused damage to their property.

Storm surges in Louisiana have been a large concern since Hurricane Katrina. In 2009 the same court ruled [JURIST report] that several contractors were not liable for damages caused by Hurricane Katrina due to dredging of the Mississippi River, which was believed to have compromised the levees in the area. In 2012 the Fifth Circuit also ruled [JURIST report] that the Army Corp of Engineers was not liable for the damages due to the canal breaches during the hurricane. In December the US Supreme Court ruled [JURIST report] that State Farm had fraudulently attempted to misclassify Hurricane Katrina claims to state they were caused by flood damage instead of wind damage in order to pass the costs to the government.