Union Pacific Railroad v. Louisiana Public Service Commission
662 F.3d 336
5th Cir.2011Background
- Louisiana enacted Act 530 (La.Rev.Stat. § 48:394) requiring railroads to obtain PSC approval before closing private crossings.
- Act 858 amended § 48:394 in 2010 after this court's Franks Investment decision, updating the closing procedure.
- Process: railroad submits a written request, states how the crossing unreasonably burdens rail transportation, PSC publishes and holds a public hearing before any closure.
- Union Pacific sued in 2009 in district court seeking federal preemption and injunction against § 48:394; district court later denied preemption and later summary judgment in favor of Louisiana after amendments.
- On appeal, Union Pacific challenged only a Louisiana constitutional taking claim; Louisiana raised Eleventh Amendment immunity for the first time on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Louisiana waived Eleventh Amendment immunity by district-court participation | Union Pacific contends immunity was waived by defending on the merits. | Louisiana argues no unequivocal waiver occurred; immunity can be raised post-claim when not clearly waived. | Immunity not waived; appeal dismissed and case remanded. |
| Whether the State's Eleventh Amendment immunity applies to district-court proceedings | Union Pacific treats immunity as not applicable due to district-court posture. | State maintains immunity applies; not waived; can be raised on appeal. | State entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity; dismissal warranted. |
| Whether the State voluntarily invoked federal jurisdiction to waive immunity | By participating in merits issues, the State effectively invoked federal forum. | Participation on merits does not equal unequivocal waiver; voluntariness required. | No voluntary invocation; no waiver. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lapides v. Bd. of Regents, 535 U.S. 613 (2002) (Immunity may be raised if not waived; forum choice matters)
- Benzing v. Texas, 410 F.3d 236 (5th Cir. 2005) (voluntary invocation principle applies to waiver through litigation conduct)
- Atascadero State Hosp. v. Scanlon, 473 U.S. 234 (1985) (unequivocal indication required for waiver of immunity)
- Phx. Intern. Software, Inc. v. Union, 653 F.3d 448 (7th Cir. 2011) (voluntary invocation principle applies to waiver of immunity)
- Union Elec. Co. v. Mo. Dep't of Conservation, 366 F.3d 655 (8th Cir. 2004) (state immunity may be raised after defense on merits)
- Neinast v. Texas, 217 F.3d 275 (5th Cir. 2000) (litigating a motion to dismiss is not a waiver of immunity)
- Skelton v. Camp, 234 F.3d 292 (5th Cir. 2000) (issues of immunity need not be raised at trial)
- Evans v. City of Bishop, 238 F.3d 586 (5th Cir. 2000) (immunity issues may be raised later)
- Wis. Dept. of Corrections v. Schacht, 524 U.S. 381 (1998) (discussion of sovereign immunity and related concerns)