DeSantis Administration Seeks to Scuttle Piney Point Lawsuit
Gov. Ron DeSantis said that the state is already working to resolve the problems at the Piney Point site, where massive amounts of polluted water were released this spring to avert a potential catastrophe.
December 07, 2021 at 12:58 PM
3 minute read
Contending that the case is moot, Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration is asking a federal judge to toss out a lawsuit that targets the state and other defendants over a former phosphate-plant site where massive amounts of polluted water were released this spring to avert a potential catastrophe.
Attorneys for DeSantis and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection said Friday in motions to dismiss the case that the state is already working to resolve the problems at the Piney Point site, including with $100 million that lawmakers earmarked in April. Also, a court-appointed receiver has been appointed in a separate case involving Piney Point.
"The Piney Point facility will be closed as swiftly and safely as possible," attorneys for the Department of Environmental Protection wrote in a 49-page motion Friday. "Mobilizing all three branches of state government, the state of Florida is making considerable progress toward this goal."
The Center for Biological Diversity, Tampa Bay Waterkeeper, Suncoast Waterkeeper, Manasota-88 and Our Children's Earth Foundation filed the federal lawsuit in June, alleging that the state and other defendants long mishandled the Manatee County site.
The lawsuit came after about 215 million gallons of wastewater were discharged from the site into Tampa Bay in April because of fears about a potentially catastrophic breach of a reservoir. The lawsuit said the discharges, in part, caused harmful algae blooms and fish kills. Also, nearby residents had to be temporarily evacuated because of fears of a breach.
In an amended version of the lawsuit filed last month, attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote that the defendants' "malfeasance must stop." The lawsuit alleges violations of the federal Clean Water Act and a law known as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
"For decades, defendants have known that the Piney Point phosphate facility threatens imminent and substantial endangerment to Floridians' lives, health and environment," the lawsuit said.
In addition to DeSantis and the Department of Environmental Protection, the other defendants are property owner HRK Holdings, LLC and the Manatee County Port Authority, both of which also filed motions to dismiss the case Friday.
Piney Point includes hazardous phosphogypsum stacks, a byproduct of phosphate production, which took place at the site from 1966 to 1999. State and local officials and HRK scrambled to shore up the site in April after leaks of wastewater raised concerns about a breach.
In the lawsuit, attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote they are seeking to "ensure Piney Point is operated and closed in a manner that complies with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and abates the present imminent and substantial endangerment to human health and the environment, including endangered species such as manatees and sea turtles."
The groups asked a judge to take a series of steps, including requiring the defendants "to abate the present imminent and substantial endangerment to health and/or the environment at Piney Point." They also asked for the judge to "exercise close supervision" of work on closing the site.
The DeSantis administration lawyers dispute that the state has violated the federal laws, but they also argue the lawsuit should be rejected because it is moot, in part because of the court-ordered receiver in the separate case.
"Here, a receiver has been appointed, funding is in place, and the receiver is doing preparatory work with an engineering firm that will draw up plans to close the facility," the Department of Environmental Protection's motion said. "Plaintiffs are not entitled to anything further from this court."
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Trending Stories
- 1Authenticating Electronic Signatures
- 2'Fulfilled Her Purpose on the Court': Presiding Judge M. Yvette Miller Is 'Ready for a New Challenge'
- 3Litigation Leaders: Greenspoon Marder’s Beth-Ann Krimsky on What Makes Her Team ‘Prepared, Compassionate and Wicked Smart’
- 4A Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
- 5Grabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250