Prysok v. National Park Service

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan
DecidedJanuary 8, 2025
Docket2:24-cv-00015
StatusUnknown

This text of Prysok v. National Park Service (Prysok v. National Park Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Prysok v. National Park Service, (W.D. Mich. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER PRYSOK, Case No. 2:24-cv-15

Plaintiff, Hon. Jane M. Beckering U.S. District Judge v.

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,

Defendant. __________________________________/ REPORT & RECOMMENDATION I. Introduction Plaintiff Christopher Prysok, representing himself, filed his unverified complaint on January 29, 2024. (ECF No. 1.) The National Park Service (“NPS”) is the only Defendant. Plaintiff alleges in general terms that the NPS violated his rights by terminating a Commercial Use Authorization (CUA) he obtained on behalf of a Limited Liability Company (LLC) to operate kayaking tours within the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore. (ECF No. 1, PageID.2-3.) Plaintiff Prysok also alleges that he had a CUA to operate tours in the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. (Id., PageID.1.) Plaintiff asserts that “Apostle Islands Adventures” is an LLC. (ECF No. 1, PageID.2.) The State of Wisconsin’s Department of Financial Institutions includes a listing for “APOSTLE ISLANDS ADVENTURES LLC”, with a registration date of Feb. 5, 2019, and an entity ID of A088304. Leonard Prysok is listed as the registered agent of this entity. The registered agent’s office is located in Washburn, WI. The State of Wisconsin’s Department of Financial Institutions notes that this LLC was administratively dissolved on July 28, 2022.1 The bulk of Plaintiff Prysok’s factual allegations (see ECF No. 1, PageID.2-3

(paragraphs 1-18 of the complaint)) focus on Defendant NPS’s alleged wrongful termination of the CUA it had issued to Apostle Islands Adventures LLC to operate kayak tours in the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in Wisconsin. Plaintiff Prysok also asserts that he had a CUA to operate kayaking tours in the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, which is located in the State of Michigan. (Id., PageID.2.) The State of Michigan’s Department of Licensing and Regulatory

Affairs includes a listing for “PICTURED ROCKS ADVENTURE LLC”, with a date of organization of Feb. 4, 2019, and an identification number of 802282261. Plaintiff Prysok is listed as the resident agent. He lists an address in Millersburg, Michigan, which is in the Eastern District of Michigan.2 This Report & Recommendation (R. & R.) addresses the Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 12), and Plaintiff’s (i) motion to add parties (ECF No. 11), (ii) motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 19), and (iii) motion to file a supplemental brief

regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the Chevron doctrine (ECF No. 27). The undersigned respectfully recommends that the Court grant the NPS’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Prysock has not

1 See addendum to this R. & R. 2 See addendum to this R. & R. demonstrated that he has Article III standing to assert claims on behalf of the CUA holders: Apostle Island Adventures LLC and Pictured Rocks Adventures LLC. In addition, the undersigned concludes that Plaintiff Prysok, who is not an attorney,

may not file a lawsuit on behalf of these two LLCs. Thus, as an alternative, the undersigned recommends dismissal of this case without prejudice. The undersigned also recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff’s (i) motion to add parties (ECF No. 11), (ii) motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 19), and (iii) motion to file a supplemental brief regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the Chevron doctrine (ECF No. 27). The undersigned concludes that Plaintiff’s motions are moot

in light of the undersigned’s recommendation. II. Factual Allegations As noted above, Plaintiff Prysok’s complaint focuses on the termination of the CUA issued to Apostle Islands Adventure LLC to operate in the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in Wisconsin. Prysok says that in 2019 he obtained a CUA to operate kayaking tours at Apostle Islands and Pictured Rocks. On July 27, 2019, NPS suspended and revoked Prysok’s CUA at Apostle Islands. (ECF No. 1,

PageID.2.) Prysok claims that the reasons for revocation were unverified and that no citations had been issued against him prior to the revocation. (Id.) Prysok further claims that the revocation has jeopardized his livelihood. (Id.) Prysok states that arbitrary and capricious actions by NPS may be nullified under the Administrative Procedures Act. (Id.) He further asserts that the revocation of his Apostle Island CUA without court intervention violated his due process rights, and that unverified claims by Apostle Islands and Pictured Rocks constitute defamation.3 (Id.) Prysok also says that in 2021, Pictured Rocks denied his appeal based upon unsubstantiated claims. (Id., PageID.5.)

Prysok says that other “outfitters” were treated differently before their CUAs were revoked because the NPS provided opportunities to update their application packet. Prysok says he was treated differently because the NPS did not provide him with a similar opportunity to update his application. (Id., PageID.6-7.) NPS has provided the five-page declaration of Tracy Simmons, a commercial services chief for the NPS. (ECF No. 13-1.) This declaration is supported by a number

of documents relating to CUAs that were issues to Apostle Islands Adventures, LLC, and Pictured Rocks Adventure, LLC. Simmons’s declaration and supporting documents appear to go well beyond the scope of Plaintiff Prysok’s factual allegations. Nevertheless, Simmons chronicles the termination of the CUAs issued to Apostle Islands Adventure LLC and Pictured Rocks Adventures LLC. Simmons stated that Prysok had previously held CUAs for the Apostle Islands and Pictured Rocks National Lakeshores, in Wisconsin and Michigan, respectively. (Id., PageID.91.) The

CUA for the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore was issued on June 21, 2019, and the CUA for Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore was issued on March 9, 2021. (Id.)

3 In his complaint, Plaintiff cites Saucier v. Katz, 53 U.S. 194 (2001) to argue that qualified immunity is not available to individual officers. He also cites to Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 6558 (1978) to argue that local governments can be liable under 42 U.S.C § 1983. Neither of these cases are applicable in this case. NPS cannot argue an entitlement to qualified immunity and NPS is not a state or local government capable of being sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 27, 2019, the Superintendent at Apostle Islands National Lakeshore revoked the CUA for failure to adhere to CUA conditions. (Id., PageID.92.) Prior to revoking the CUA, the Superintendent sent several written notifications of violations of CUA

policy. (Id.) Along with the revocation, the Superintendent informed Prysok that he had the option to appeal the revocation, but Prysok never appealed the decision. (Id.) According to Simmons, Prysok still had the ability to perform kayak tours at Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. (Id.) In June of 2021, several written warnings were issued to Prysok for failure to adhere to CUA standards. (Id.) On July 31, 2021, law enforcement officers issued citations to Pictured Rocks Adventure LLC and its

employees for attempting a guided tour in life-threatening conditions. (Id., PageID.93.) The tour resulted in a swamped vessel, an emergency rescue, and several park visitors being diagnosed with hypothermia. (Id.) As a result of the incident and prior written warnings, the Superintendent of Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore suspended the CUA for kayaking tours on August 4, 2021. (Id.) Prysok appealed the suspension on August 6, 2021. His appeal was subsequently denied. (Id.) On March 17, 2022, the CUA for Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore was fully revoked. (Id.)

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

Related

Wilbur v. Almy
53 U.S. 180 (Supreme Court, 1852)
Thomas v. Arn
474 U.S. 140 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Lattanzio v. Comta
481 F.3d 137 (Second Circuit, 2007)
In Re ICLNDS Notes Acquisition, LLC
259 B.R. 289 (N.D. Ohio, 2001)
Salem Springs, LLC v. Salem Township
312 Mich. App. 210 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2015)
Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins
578 U.S. 330 (Supreme Court, 2016)
Daniel Marx v. Richard L. Morris
2019 WI 34 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2019)
Peterson v. City of Grand Rapids
182 F. Supp. 3d 750 (W.D. Michigan, 2016)
Crookston v. Johnson
370 F. Supp. 3d 804 (W.D. Michigan, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Prysok v. National Park Service, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prysok-v-national-park-service-miwd-2025.