Mildenberger v. United States
643 F.3d 938
| Fed. Cir. | 2011Background
- Claimants own property along the St. Lucie River and St. Lucie Canal; the Government discharges Lake Okeechobee water into the estuary for decades; the suit seeks compensation for alleged takings due to pollution and altered water conditions; the Court of Federal Claims dismissed as time-barred and for lack of compensable Florida riparian rights; the claim was filed in 2006, six years after accrual would have begun; the court addressed accrual, stabilization, mitigation promises, and Florida-law property interests; the Federal Circuit reviews without deference on jurisdiction and summary judgment issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stabilization doctrine applies to toll accrual. | Mildenberger supports stabilization delaying accrual. | No stabilization since no discrete invasion; harm observable earlier. | Stabilization does not apply; accrual timely under traditional rules. |
| Whether mitigation promises delayed accrual. | Promises to mitigate delayed permanence of damage. | Mitigation evidence insufficient; no prior commitments. | Mitigation promises did not resurrect stale takings claims. |
| Whether Florida law recognizes compensable riparian rights here. | Claimants possess exclusive riparian rights including pollution-free water. | Florida law does not recognize such compensable rights for these claimants. | No compensable riparian rights recognized under Florida law. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Dickinson, 331 U.S. 745 (1947) (stabilization for gradual takings; fairness in accrual timing)
- United States v. Dow, 357 U.S. 17 (1958) (limits Dickinson; stabilization narrow for flooding cases)
- Fallini v. United States, 56 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (narrow interpretation of Dickinson and stabilization)
- Kabua v. United States, 546 F.2d 381 (1976) (Courts’ view of stabilization in context)
- Boling v. United States, 220 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (touchstone: when environmental damage is substantial and foreseeable)
- Applegate v. United States, 25 F.3d 1579 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (mitigation can delay accrual when predictability of damage is unsettled)
- Banks v. United States, 314 F.3d 1304 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (mitigation promises can delay accrual until permanence is clear)
- Huntleigh USA Corp. v. United States, 525 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (takings include regulatory burdens as Fifth Amendment basis)
- Am. Pelagic Fishing Co. v. United States, 379 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (property interests depend on state law where property lies)
- Goodrich v. United States, 434 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (stabilization principle regarding permanent nature of taking)
- Ferry Pass Inspectors' & Shippers' Ass'n v. White's River Inspectors' & Shippers' Ass'n, 48 So.2d 645 (Fla.) (Florida common-law riparian rights)
- Belvedere Dev. Corp. v. Dep't of Transp., 476 So.2d 649 (Fla.1985) (tax law vs. property rights in riparian context)