Van Orden v. Borough of Woodstown New Jersey
703 F. App'x 153
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- During Hurricane Irene (Aug 2011) the Veterans Memorial Lake Dam in Woodstown, NJ, had its floodgates opened by local officials to lower upstream water levels; the Dam later overtopped and the Emergency Action Plan (EAP) was activated.
- Route 40 (a state highway) near Kings Highway flooded downstream; Woodstown notified State Police who had jurisdiction over the road and said they would close it; Woodstown did not physically close the road.
- Salem County had issued a travel ban and the Governor declared a State of Emergency; the State Police declined to place blocking signs due to high-wind hazard.
- Two days after gates were opened, Celena Sylvestri drove onto the flooded Route 40 despite the travel ban, was swept from the road, called 911, and drowned.
- Van Orden sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming Appellees created a state-created danger by opening the floodgates (and failing to update the EAP), and the District Court granted summary judgment for defendants; the Third Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Appellees’ opening of the floodgates (and related failures) constituted a "state-created danger" under the Due Process Clause | Van Orden: Opening floodgates without closing the threatened road (and EAP failures) foreseeably and directly precipitated drowning | Appellees: Multiple intervening factors (saturated ground, overtopping regardless of gates, blocked pipe surge, state police jurisdiction, plaintiff’s decision to drive) break causation | Affirmed for defendants — causation too attenuated; not a "fairly direct" cause |
| Whether Appellees acted with conscience-shocking culpability | Van Orden: EAP omissions and decision not to close the road show culpability | Appellees: Actions were reasonable given division of authority and notice to State Police | Court did not reach this as dispositive; focused on causation and found plaintiff failed to meet burden |
| Whether plaintiff was a foreseeable, discrete victim (as opposed to the public at large) | Van Orden: Motorists on Route 40 were a foreseeable class at risk | Appellees: Sylvestri was a random member of the public who chose to travel despite bans | Court held plaintiff was a member of the general public; this attenuated causation analysis |
| Whether factual disputes precluded summary judgment | Van Orden: Expert evidence shows gates increased release and danger | Appellees: Evidence shows other independent causes and that State Police were responsible for road closure | Court: Even viewing facts favorably to plaintiff, no reasonable jury could find fairly direct causation; summary judgment appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Phillips v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224 (3d Cir. 2008) (explains state-created danger framework and fact-specific "fairly direct" causation inquiry)
- Bright v. Westmoreland County, 443 F.3d 276 (3d Cir. 2006) (sets forth four elements of state-created danger claim)
- Henry v. City of Erie, 728 F.3d 275 (3d Cir. 2013) (causation attenuated where many links intervene between government act and harm)
- Morse v. Lower Merion School Dist., 132 F.3d 902 (3d Cir. 1997) (official acts must precipitate or catalyze harm to be "fairly direct")
- Faush v. Tuesday Morning, Inc., 808 F.3d 208 (3d Cir. 2015) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- McCabe v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 494 F.3d 418 (3d Cir. 2007) (nonmoving party must present specific facts to survive summary judgment)