ELR Citation: ELR 20798
No(s). 74-1730 (2d Cir. Sep 16, 1974)

The court affirms a lower court's denial of injunctive relief in a suit seeking to halt construction of a highway segment in Connecticut until a NEPA impact statement has been filed. The court finds that this portion of Route 7 does not constitute federal action since only state funds are to be used in its construction, and that therefore not EIS was required.

A lengthy dissent argues that the project is federal action since it is an integral part of a larger federally funded highway, is connected, without exit, to an existing federally funded bridge, and has received federal funds for planning purposes. The dissent also notes that an appeal in Conservation Society of Southern Vermont v. Secretary of Transportation is pending before the court, and contends that a decision in the instant case should have been deferred until Conservation Society, in which Judge Oakes concluded that another segment of Route 7 was federal action, can be heard, and the two cases then decided together.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Haynes N. Johnson
Alphonse R. Noe
Bryan, Parmelee, Johnson & Bollinger
460 Summer Street
Stamford, CT 06901

Counsel for Defendants
Clement J. Kichuk Asst. Attorney General
State Capitol
210 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06115

Richard Goodman
Bailey & Weschler
266 Pearl Street
Hartford, CT 06103

William J. Lynch Counsel
Conn. Department of Transportation
165 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06115