SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A Neutral Corner
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ilaine who wrote (1628)12/4/2005 11:16:41 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) of 2253
 
Gross negligence is a very tough standard under Louisiana law. I'm certainly not going prejudge its existence based on a few news reports.

The designers are not the COE and its staff but private engineers, M&M in this case, who are hired by the local authority. The COE reviews plans and approves and supervises construction. It is there to make sure the approved plans and specs are followed. Thus, since it is not a designer, the COE would be judged not for what it designs but for its other responsibilities. It seems not to have picked up what at first glance appear to be some fairly obvious design flaws, so obvious that I think there is probably a whole lot more to the story than anyone thinks. A lot more than the media is reporting, for sure.

I think you misunderstand the discretionary function defense. It has to do more with the distinction between acts performed as part of a policy and acts which are routine. Here, I think approving the presumably deficient plans was discretionary while apparently failing to make sure they were followed during construction is not. The latter I think may make for a good FTCA claim, but plaintiffs are going to have to solve a serious causation problem in order to recover against the government: If the design was flawed it doesn't make any difference that the construction did not follow the defective plans since a disaster would have occurred anyway. A very good argument along these lines can probably be made that everything flowed from the badly designed floodwalls for which the COE is immune.

And there won't be a jury hearing the FTCA claim.

A tough case against the COE, I think, which will go on for years. The private defendants are essentially irrelevant.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News