17 F.4th 563
5th Cir.2021Background
- Plaintiffs Terri Lewis Stevens, Craig Rivera, and Jennifer Rivera own adjoining properties on Dove Park Road in St. Tammany Parish and allege sewage and stormwater from parish drainage and subdivision development flow across their land into waters of the United States.
- Plaintiffs sued St. Tammany in Louisiana state court in 2015 asserting multiple state-law claims; the trial court entered final judgment for St. Tammany on August 17, 2018, and the Louisiana First Circuit later affirmed on April 8, 2021 (La. Supreme Court review pending).
- In 2020 plaintiffs filed a federal suit asserting largely the same state-law claims plus Clean Water Act (CWA) claims and alleging permit violations and failure to enforce environmental requirements.
- The district court dismissed the non-CWA claims as barred by res judicata (applying Louisiana preclusion law) and dismissed the CWA claims under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a plausible claim; it also denied injunctive relief and denied plaintiffs’ Rule 59(e) motion seeking leave to file a third amended complaint.
- Plaintiffs appealed; the Fifth Circuit reviewed dismissal de novo and discretionary rulings for abuse of discretion and affirmed the district court in all respects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether non-CWA state-law claims are barred by res judicata | Plaintiffs: state-court judgment not "final" because appeal pending and federal suit raises post-judgment violations and new evidence | St. Tammany: August 17, 2018 trial-court judgment is final for res judicata; federal claims arise from same transactions and pre-date judgment | Affirmed: under Louisiana law the trial-court judgment was final for preclusion; all res judicata elements met so non-CWA claims barred |
| Whether CWA citizen-suit allegations survive Rule 12(b)(6) | Plaintiffs: alleged ongoing discharges and permit violations; they gave notice as required | St. Tammany: pleadings lack specific factual allegations linking parish conduct to addition of pollutants to navigable waters; pre-suit notice and pleading deficiencies | Affirmed: plaintiffs forfeited challenge to sufficiency of pleadings and allegations in operative complaints were conclusory; dismissal stands |
| Whether district court abused discretion by denying leave to file third amended complaint | Plaintiffs: new exhibits and a proposed third amended complaint would cure defects | St. Tammany: plaintiffs had multiple opportunities and attempts to cure; amendment would be untimely and futile | Affirmed: court did not abuse discretion—plaintiffs had prior chances, lacked diligence, and offer of new facts was not shown to be unavailable earlier |
| Whether injunctive relief should have been granted | Plaintiffs: irreparable harm from ongoing discharges and hundreds of supporting exhibits | St. Tammany: plaintiffs cannot show likelihood of success on merits or meet other equitable factors | Affirmed: because merits claims were properly dismissed, injunction relief was not warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Budhathoki v. Nielsen, 898 F.3d 504 (5th Cir. 2018) (Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal reviewed de novo)
- Test Masters Educ. Servs., Inc. v. Singh, 428 F.3d 559 (5th Cir. 2005) (preclusion doctrine overview)
- Kansa Reinsurance Co. v. Cong. Mortg. Corp. of Tex., 20 F.3d 1362 (5th Cir. 1994) (affirmative defenses apparent on face of pleadings may justify Rule 12 dismissal)
- County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, 140 S. Ct. 1462 (U.S. 2020) (CWA prohibits addition of pollutants from point source to navigable waters; functional-equivalent test)
- Burguieres v. Pollingue, 843 So. 2d 1049 (La. 2003) (elements for res judicata under La. R.S. § 13:4231)
- Tolis v. Bd. of Supervisors of La. State Univ., 660 So. 2d 1206 (La. 1995) (judgment deciding merits is final and preclusive except on direct review)
- Rosenzweig v. Azurix Corp., 332 F.3d 854 (5th Cir. 2003) (leave to amend governed by Rule 15 factors; undue delay and failure to cure can justify denial)
- U.S. ex rel. Spicer v. Westbrook, 751 F.3d 354 (5th Cir. 2014) (denial of leave to amend after dismissal reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Env’t Tex. Citizen Lobby, Inc. v. ExxonMobil Corp., 824 F.3d 507 (5th Cir. 2016) (standards for permanent injunction under federal law)