Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Lee v. Resor

Citation: 2 ELR 20665
No. Nos. 72-382-Civ-J-S, -385-Civ-J-S, 348 F. Supp. 389/4 ERC 1579/(M.D. Fla., 09/14/1972)

NEPA neither requires nor precludes a moratorium on continuing projects begun before its enactment, while an environmental impact statement is being prepared. Because the evidence is not sufficient to justify the issuance of a preliminary injunction and because the spraying of 2-4 D to kill hyacinths on the St. Johns River in Florida has continued for twenty years, the court will not enjoin further spraying at this time. However, the court has jurisdiction to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement while the project continues and so orders. Plaintiffs, who allege a direct pecuniary loss to their business as commercial fishermen, fish camp operators and to their other water-related income activities, have standing to bring this action of the basis of both the "economic injury" test and the "injury in fact" test.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Stephen H. Davis
P. Donald DeHoff
802 Barnett Bank Building
Jacksonville, Florida 32202

Ronald E. Clark
523 St. Johns Avenue
Palatka, Florida 32077

Jackson Bryan
100 South Palm Avenue
Palatka, Florida 32077

Counsel for Defendants
Mr. Schlesinger U.S. Attorney
Mr. Roberts U.S. Attorney
Post Office Box 59
Jacksonville, Florida 32201