Harrison County, Mississippi v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi
DecidedMay 28, 2020
Docket1:19-cv-00986
StatusUnknown

This text of Harrison County, Mississippi v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Harrison County, Mississippi v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Mississippi primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harrison County, Mississippi v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (S.D. Miss. 2020).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION

HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI; HANCOCK COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI; CITY OF BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI; CITY OF D’IBERVILLE, MISSISSIPPI; CITY OF WAVELAND, MISSISSIPPI; MISSISSIPPI HOTEL AND LODGING ASSOCIATION; MISSISSIPPI COMMERCIAL FISHERIES UNITED, INC.; PASS CHRISTIAN, MISSISSIPPI; and CITY OF DIAMONDHEAD, MISSISSIPPI PLAINTIFFS

v. CAUSE NO. 1:19cv986-LG-RHW

MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION and U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DEFENDANTS

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR JURISDICTIONAL DISCOVERY

BEFORE THE COURT is the [21] Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery filed by the plaintiffs, Harrison County, Mississippi, Hancock County, Mississippi, City of Biloxi, Mississippi, City of D’Iberville, Mississippi, City of Waveland, Mississippi, Mississippi Hotel and Lodging Association, Mississippi Commercial Fisheries United, Inc., Pass Christian, Mississippi, and City of Diamondhead, Mississippi. The parties have fully briefed the Motion. When reviewing claims under the APA, such as those presented in this matter, the Court is required to review “the whole record or those parts of it cited by a party.” 5 U.S.C. § 706. “Supplementation of the administrative record is not allowed unless the moving party demonstrates ‘unusual circumstances justifying a departure’ from the general presumption that review is limited to the record compiled by the agency.” Medina Cty. Envtl. Action Ass’n v. Surface Transp. Bd.,

602 F.3d 687, 706 (5th Cir. 2010). The Court finds that the plaintiffs’ Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery should be granted to the extent that the defendants are ordered to designate and produce the administrative record in this matter by July 13, 2020. The Motion requesting discovery is denied in all other respects at this time. The plaintiffs will be permitted to provide a supplemental brief concerning the defendants’ [16] Motion to Dismiss or, if necessary, file a second motion for jurisdictional discovery on or before

August 14, 2020. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the [21] Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery filed by the plaintiffs, Harrison County, Mississippi, Hancock County, Mississippi, City of Biloxi, Mississippi, City of D’Iberville, Mississippi, City of Waveland, Mississippi, Mississippi Hotel and Lodging Association, Mississippi Commercial Fisheries United, Inc., Pass Christian,

Mississippi, and City of Diamondhead, Mississippi, is GRANTED to the extent that the defendants are ordered to designate and produce the administrative record. The Motion is DENIED in all other respects. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiffs will be permitted to provide a supplemental brief concerning the defendants’ [16] Motion to Dismiss or, if necessary, file a second motion for jurisdictional discovery on or before August 14, 2020. SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 28th day of May, 2020. Louis Guirola, Jr. s/ LOUIS GUIROLA, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Harrison County, Mississippi v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrison-county-mississippi-v-us-army-corps-of-engineers-mssd-2020.