St. Tammany Parish v. FEMA, 556 F.3d 307
(5th Cir. 2009)





Who triggers the Stafford Act?
What does this person do?
What was the triggering event in this case?
What is the Parish suing for?
What are the broader implications of this case for
projects like the Charity Hospital?
1
Implementing the Stafford Act




What agency was delegated the authority to carry
out the Stafford Act functions?
Does FEMA have unlimited funds to respond to
disasters?
Are there unlimited contractors and equipment to
respond?
How should FEMA allocate its resources?
2
Why should FEMA pay for Debris
Removal?




What is the standard for the feds to pay for debris
removal?
How is the public interest defined in these
regulations?
What does the reg say about the duty of FEMA to
pay for debris removal?
Does the presidents declaration that the parish is
eligible for funds mandate that it get funds?
3
What is the Threat?




Did FEMA find that the debris were an immediate
threat to public health?
What does FEMA see its role in clearing the
canals?
What does FEMA want to prevent?
What does the Parish want FEMA to do that FEMA
does not see as a public health threat?
4
Claim 1

The Parish's first count alleged that defendants
violated the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5170 and
5173, by wrongfully refusing to fund dredging of
the Parish's Coin du Lestin canals.
5
Claim 2

The second count alleged that defendants were
liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"),
28 U.S.C. § 2674, for the same conduct.
6
Claim 3

The third count alleged that defendants violated
the Administrative Procedures Act ("APA"), 5
U.S.C. § 553, and the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. §
5165c, because FEMA's refusal to approve
funding constituted a substantive rule change
about which FEMA never provided the public with
notice and an opportunity to comment.
7
Claim 4

The fourth count alleged that defendants deprived
the Parish of its right under the Stafford Act, id. §
5189a, and corresponding regulations, to appeal
FEMA's denial of the requested funding.
8
Claim 5

Lastly, the fifth count alleged that defendants violated the
Stafford Act, id. § 5151, by failing to treat the residents of
the Coin du Lestin community in a fair and equitable
manner because FEMA funded similar projects in other
communities. Plaintiff sought an order requiring FEMA to
cover the costs of debris removal, a declaratory judgment
that the government's policies violated the Stafford Act,
and a monetary judgment in tort for sums required for
debris removal.
9
Procedure



Based on Berkovitz, what did the district court
find?
What does the plaintiff have to show first when
there is a claim against the government?
How does the court say that the discretionary
function exception in the Stafford Act compares to
the same exemption in the FTCA?
10
The Non-Discretionary Duty




Where does the plaintiff find evidence of a nondiscretionary duty to fund the debris removal?
What language does the court point to in finding
these documents do not create a duty?
Do the regs say must or may?
What did the court hold?
11