Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Clark v. Volpe

Clark v. Volpe, 461 F.2d 1266 (5th Cir. 1972)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1972-07-10
Topic: general

How later courts describe this case

where plaintiffs stood idly by as a city park was stripped and levelled to build a highway
plaintiffs barred by laches from seeking to enjoin highway construction where they had knowledge of the proposed construction but did not file a lawsuit until after construction had begun
applied laches where highway 25%-30% complete

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Clark v. Volpe. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 20 opinions

CLARK v. VOLPE,461 F.2d 1266(5th Cir. 1972)

ALBERT CLARK ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. JOHN A. VOLPE, SECRETARY OF

TRANSPORTATION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL.,

DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES, BOH BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., THE CITY OF NEW

ORLEANS, INTERVENORS-APPELLEES.

No. 72-1631.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

July 10, 1972.

Richard M. Troy, Jr., New Orleans, La., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Kent Frizzell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gerald J. Gallinghouse, U.S. Atty., John R. Schupp, Asst. U.S. Atty., New Orleans, La., George R. Hyde, Dirk D. Snel, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Secretary of Transportation.

Norman L. Sisson, Robert J. Jones, Howard P. Elliott, Jr., Baton Rouge, La., for Dept. of Highways of the State of La.

Ralph L. Kaskell, Jr., of Deutsch, Kerrigan Stiles, New Orleans, La., for Boh Bros. Construction Co., Inc., R. Emmett Kerrigan, Charles K. Reasonover, New Orleans, La., of counsel.

David S. Cressy, Deputy City Atty., New Orleans, La., for City of New Orleans.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana; R. Blake West, Judge.

Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and GODBOLD and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[1] This is a class action in which plaintiffs seek to enjoin the construction, already in progress when suit was filed, of Interstate Highway 610 through City Park in the City of New Orleans. Suit was filed February 24, 1972, and on March 21, 1972, after an evidentiary hearing confined to the issue of laches, the court dismissed the action by application of the doctrine of laches. Its reasons for judgment are set forth in342 F. Supp. 1324.

[2] The decision of the District Court must be, and is, affirmed. Ragland v. Mueller,460 F.2d 1196[5th Cir., 1972.]Page 1267