ELR Citation: ELR 20602
No(s). s. CV80-PT5300-NE, CV84-PT1194-S (N.D. Ala. Apr 4, 1985)

The court holds that a nuisance suit for injunctive relief is barred by res judicata when the United States and Alabama signed a consent decree without fraud, collusion, or conflict of interest following a parens patriae suit against the present defendant. The court first holds that the consent decree in the prior suit was a final judgment on the merits. The court then holds that the United States and Alabama were serving in their parens patriae capacity in the prior litigation, since they were defending quasi-sovereign interests by protecting the health of their residents. Specifically, the court holds that while Alabama did not participate in the consent decree negotiation, it had knowledge of and consented to the agreement, that it was not prevented from suing the United States, and that the United States could represent various agencies without being guilty of a conflict of interest. The court then rejects the challenges to the consent decree, finding no evidence of fraud, collusion, or conflict of interest, and rules that the United States should not be held to the same standards as a private fiduciary. The court then holds that the suit is barred by laches, even though it was brought before the statute of limitations had run.The court finds that the plaintiffs had full knowledge of the consent decree negotiations and opportunity to object, and that their awareness of the defendant's subsequent effort to comply makes their delay culpable and prejudicial to the defendant. Since the plaintiffs were adequately represented in previous litigation, their interests will not be prejudiced by dismissal, and their claim that only recent investigation revealed the inadequacies of the consent decree is meritless due to the court's finding that there was no collusion by the parties. Finally, the court denies jurisdiction under the Administrative Procedure Act for injunctive relief against the United States, because the Federal Tort Claims Act is the exclusive remedy for tort claims and denies injunctive relief.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Fournier J. Gale III
Maynard, Cooper, Frierson and Gale
12th Floor Watts Bldg., Third Ave. North and 20th St., Birmingham AL 35203
(205) 252-2889

Counsel for Defendants
Kenneth Reich
Land and Natural Resources Division
Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 633-4081

G. Lee Garrett Jr.
Hansell and Post
330 First Atlanta Tower, Atlanta GA 30383
(404) 581-8000