United States v. Robert Geranis
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21648
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Benton County Sewer District No. 1 (the District) operated a sewer system financed in part by USDA revenue bonds; voters in the District approved dissolution in the April 2, 2013 election.
- The United States (on behalf of USDA) filed suit the day before the election seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent dissolution, obtaining a TRO and then a preliminary injunction to preserve the system and USDA’s bond remedy.
- A four-person Voter Representative Group (the Group), all District voters/ratepayers, sought to intervene to defend the election result and press several related interests; the district court denied intervention under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a).
- While the Group’s appeal was pending, the United States and Missouri (the State) negotiated an asset-purchase agreement selling the sewer system to Missouri-American for $750,000 (partial payment to USDA), after which the District would be dissolved.
- The Group renewed its motion to intervene to oppose approval of the sale; the district court again denied intervention and found the Group lacked Article III standing.
- The Eighth Circuit affirmed, holding the Group failed to establish an individualized, concrete injury that is traceable and redressable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Group has Article III standing to intervene | Group: voters/ratepayers suffer concrete harms from how dissolution and asset sale are handled | U.S./State: Group asserts generalized grievances, lacks individualized injury and redressability | Denied — Group lacks Article III standing; cannot intervene |
| Right to immediate dissolution of the District | Group: uphold the April 2 vote and effect immediate dissolution | U.S./State: dissolution must comply with Missouri law, including satisfying indebtedness | Denied — interest is shared/generalized and seeks unlawful immediate dissolution |
| Right to avoid repayment of USDA revenue bond | Group: as ratepayers, oppose bond repayment that could raise rates | U.S./State: bond repayment is required by bond documents and Missouri law; sale reduces burden | Denied — injury speculative, not imminent, and remedy would conflict with law |
| Challenge to State enforcement of Missouri Clean Water Law | Group: oppose State’s claims that require system repairs/operation | U.S./State: enforcement affects public, not a particularized harm to Group | Denied — asserted harm is a generalized grievance, not an individualized injury |
| Claim re: ability to construct on-site sewage systems after sale | Group: seek to promote on-site alternatives for members | U.S./State: state approval required and geology limits feasibility; dissolution/sale does not guarantee relief | Denied — injury not personal/individualized and redress not likely or assured |
Key Cases Cited
- Standard Heating & Air Conditioning Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 137 F.3d 567 (8th Cir. 1998) (Article III standing is a prerequisite to intervene)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requires injury, causation, redressability)
- Curry v. Regents of the Univ. of Minn., 167 F.3d 420 (8th Cir. 1999) (injury must be concrete, particularized, actual or imminent)
- United States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 569 F.3d 829 (8th Cir. 2009) (traceability and redressability requirements for standing)
- Nolles v. State Comm. for Reorg. of Sch. Dists., 524 F.3d 892 (8th Cir. 2008) (voters’ generalized interests do not establish standing)
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83 (1998) (relief must remedy the plaintiff’s injury to satisfy redressability)