YOUR COMMUNITY WAS
SACRIFICED TO SAVE HOUSTON
The Addicks and Barker Flood-Control Project is located in western Harris County. Built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1940s to reduce flooding risks through downtown Houston, Addicks and Barker are still operated and maintained by Army Corps. When the Army Corps originally built Addicks and Barker, it purchased only about half of the land needed to safely store the floodwaters held back and controlled by the dams. The Army Corps purchased inadequate land because it believed doing so would save the government money. Later, county authorities permitted developers to build residential neighborhoods on the privately owned land that lie within the reservoirs’ respective flood-pools.
In 2017, Hurricane Harvey brought on significant rainfall throughout the entire city of Houston. The Addicks and Barker Reservoirs, per their design and purpose, held back water to protect the City of Houston. However, court documents show that the Army Corps used over 7,000 acres of private land during and after Harvey to store the impounded floodwater. Thus, the neighborhoods upstream of the dams were sacrificed to prevent downstream flooding. The Army Corps’ decision to use this private land resulted in the extensive damage to thousands of homes and businesses upstream of the Addicks and Barker Reservoirs.
In 2017, Hurricane Harvey brought on significant rainfall throughout the entire city of Houston. The Addicks and Barker Reservoirs, per their design and purpose, held back water to protect the City of Houston. However, court documents show that the Army Corps used over 7,000 acres of private land during and after Harvey to store the impounded floodwater. Thus, the neighborhoods upstream of the dams were sacrificed to prevent downstream flooding. The Army Corps’ decision to use this private land resulted in the extensive damage to thousands of homes and businesses upstream of the Addicks and Barker Reservoirs.
|
The court appointed Armi as co-lead counsel to protect the rights of individual upstream flood claimants. Prior to the May 2019 liability trial, Armi uncovered a map developed by the Army Corps that showed the Corps knew long before Harvey the extent of the damage that would occur upstream if the Army Corps followed its standard operating procedure. In spite of this, the Corps failed to warn the public and made no changes to their operating procedures. Today, the same operating procedure is in place and, given enough rainfall, will result in future flooding of private upstream property.
The next phase of litigation, which will determine the amount of Just Compensation owed to the plaintiffs, is currently underway. However, there is still time to file a claim. |
|
Speak with a Case Evaluation Specialist: 713-230-2200
|
They said winning was impossible.
we proved them wrong.
|
|
|
Bottom Line Up Front: We Won! The pundits said winning was impossible. So-called legal experts predicted a devastating loss for the Plaintiffs. They were wrong.
After Harvey had passed and the flood waters had receded, thousands of Upstream residents and business owners demanded answers. When the public demanded justice, the Army Corps refused to take responsibility but instead, forced the Upstream residents to file lawsuits to protect and enforce their Fifth Amendment rights to just compensation. We are honored to represent over 1,400 Upstream families and businesses.
A hard-fought courtroom battle led to a historic decision. On December 17, 2019, Judge Lettow issued his ruling finding the government liable under the Fifth Amendment for the intentional flooding of Upstream homes and businesses. In a landmark order, Judge Lettow ruled that intentional Government action was the sole cause of the Upstream flooding.
After Harvey had passed and the flood waters had receded, thousands of Upstream residents and business owners demanded answers. When the public demanded justice, the Army Corps refused to take responsibility but instead, forced the Upstream residents to file lawsuits to protect and enforce their Fifth Amendment rights to just compensation. We are honored to represent over 1,400 Upstream families and businesses.
A hard-fought courtroom battle led to a historic decision. On December 17, 2019, Judge Lettow issued his ruling finding the government liable under the Fifth Amendment for the intentional flooding of Upstream homes and businesses. In a landmark order, Judge Lettow ruled that intentional Government action was the sole cause of the Upstream flooding.
The Story Behind the Win.
|
The Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims selected Armi Easterby to serve as Co-Lead Counsel and charged Armi with the important job of protecting the rights of individual plaintiffs. Throughout 2018, Armi and his team took the lead in proving the Army Corps violated the 5th Amendment’s “taking clause” by obtaining the sworn testimony of dozens of government, county, and City of Houston witnesses. Armi and his legal team also obtained pictures and videos from Upstream plaintiffs to help prove that the Army Corps’ actions were the sole cause of upstream flooding. Judge Charles Lettow heard Plaintiff after Plaintiff testify about evacuating in boats, on air mattresses, or having to wade through contaminated flood waters. Judge Lettow also witnessed how homes and possessions were submerged long after Harvey’s rainfall had stopped. He felt the community’s demand for justice when hundreds of Upstream plaintiffs showed up for the liability trial.
|
|
Armi and his legal team overcame hundreds of objections lodged by the government’s lawyers. During a 3 day cross-examination of the Army Corp’s head engineer, there came a devastating admission: the Army Corps intentionally flooded the Upstream properties during Hurricane Harvey to protect the City of Houston, and would do so again. Armi also proved that the Army Corps was well aware that Upstream property owners had no idea that they lived and worked inside an undisclosed flood pool. FEMA maps do not show this high-risk area, and many homeowners are still unaware of this classification of their property
Armi and the Upstream legal team are currently working to get financial compensation for what the government took and destroyed. We offer a free consultation with no obligation. Know your options and help us hold the government accountable. Contact us HERE.
|
Speak with a Case Evaluation Specialist: 713-230-2200
|
These homes are still in harm's wayPrivate property rights are protected by the United States Constitution under the 5th Amendment’s "taking clause." Judge Lettow’s groundbreaking decision not only held the federal government liable for the use of private property to protect the City of Houston, but found that the government took a permanent right to flood Upstream properties. In other words, the Army Corps can and will use Upstream homes to store flood water in the future. Inquire with our legal team for a free case evaluation to see if your property qualifies. If you are eligible, you may be entitled to a substantial cash award.
FEMA and flood insurance payouts do not disqualify you from this lawsuit!
Renters may also qualify for compensation. |
|
Legal Disclaimer
By clicking "Submit" I consent to being contacted at the number and email I provided by an attorney or intake staff from the litigation team at Williams Hart law firm. This may include being contacted by email text message or phone. Standard telephone, message, and data rates may apply. Clicking "Submit" communicates my electronic signature consent to being contacted. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. This ADVERTISEMENT is paid for by Williams Hart. Williams Hart will not provide your contact information to any unaffiliated third parties.
By clicking "Submit" I consent to being contacted at the number and email I provided by an attorney or intake staff from the litigation team at Williams Hart law firm. This may include being contacted by email text message or phone. Standard telephone, message, and data rates may apply. Clicking "Submit" communicates my electronic signature consent to being contacted. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. This ADVERTISEMENT is paid for by Williams Hart. Williams Hart will not provide your contact information to any unaffiliated third parties.
the facts at a glance
1. The Government Caused the Flooding
Throughout the liability trial the government relentlessly argued that Harvey’s rainfall was the cause of all flooding, and even went so far as to claim that we were taking an “extreme position” by filing a lawsuit. The government also tried to blame plaintiffs for buying homes in a “flood prone” area. Judge Lettow rejected these arguments. In truth, and as recognized in Judge Lettow’s ruling, the flooding that caused the taking was, “different in kind from that which had occurred naturally and from what plaintiffs had reason to anticipate,” because it was, “not the result of natural conditions but rather of deliberate government action.” P. 42.
After considering the evidence, Judge Lettow held that plaintiffs met their burden of showing their flooding was the “direct, natural, or probable result” of the government’s activity.
After considering the evidence, Judge Lettow held that plaintiffs met their burden of showing their flooding was the “direct, natural, or probable result” of the government’s activity.
2. The Flooding Was Intentional.
During trial we introduced evidence showing that the Corps’ standard operating procedure was (and still is) to intentionally use private property to store the water held back and controlled by the dams’ embankments.
s explained by Judge Lettow, intent in this context means whether the government, “intended to occupy the pertinent property without lawful authority or excuse.” For example, we unearthed internal Corps’ “Reservoir Structure” maps, which clearly depict thousands of homes inside Addicks and Barker’s reservoir area. A big part of our trial plan was to provide the Court with overwhelming evidence showing that, “the Corps knew from the outset that the land it purchased was inadequate to hold the amount of water” that could be contained in the reservoirs. To that end, on the first day of trial I introduced a May 1973 Memo that the Williams Hart team unearthed during:
s explained by Judge Lettow, intent in this context means whether the government, “intended to occupy the pertinent property without lawful authority or excuse.” For example, we unearthed internal Corps’ “Reservoir Structure” maps, which clearly depict thousands of homes inside Addicks and Barker’s reservoir area. A big part of our trial plan was to provide the Court with overwhelming evidence showing that, “the Corps knew from the outset that the land it purchased was inadequate to hold the amount of water” that could be contained in the reservoirs. To that end, on the first day of trial I introduced a May 1973 Memo that the Williams Hart team unearthed during:
3. The Government Benefited from the Taking.
Legally, we had to prove not only that the government-induced flooding was intentional (or foreseeable), but that the use of plaintiffs’ homes for Project operations conferred a benefit to the government. To this point, the trial testimony conclusively proved that use of Upstream homes and businesses located in the flood pools helped prevent $7 billion in additional damage during Harvey. The Order clearly states that the government expropriated a benefit when it used Plaintiffs’ lands for flood-control purposes stating that, “in the case of Addicks and Barker, the government received a notable benefit at the expense of the upstream private property owners … the government protected downstream properties from an estimated $7 billion in losses during Harvey … while concurrently causing upstream properties to suffer from severe flooding.”
We are still accepting clients and want to help you.
Speak with a case evaluation specialist today at:
713-230-2200.
Speak with a case evaluation specialist today at:
713-230-2200.
