Newell v. Baldrige

No. C81-133R (548 F. Supp. 39) (W.D. Wash. July 20, 1982)

ELR Digest

The court upholds an administrative appeals board decision to impose penalties for importing Hawksbill sea turtles in violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The court holds that the finding of ESA violations is supported by substantial evidence as required by § 11(a) of the Act. While the court agrees with the plaintiff that the Act does not impose strict liability on commercial operators for totally innocent conduct, it determines that Congress intended the ESA to impose a higher standard on commercial operators than others. Violations were properly found in this case because the plaintiff failed to refute the government's evidence that he knew or should have known that the turtles were an endangered species. The court rules that the $4,000 penalty assessed against the plaintiff for each violation is justified given thepurposes of the Act, the number of turtles involved, the plaintiff's complicity and intent, the fact that this is a first violation, and the penalties assessed in other cases. The court also affirms the finding of violations and assessment of penalties under the Lacey Act for mislabeling boxes of imported sea turtles.

The full text of this opinion is available from ELR (14 pp. $2.25, ELR Order No. C-1305).

Counsel for Plaintiff
Louis D. Peterson
Hart, Allison, Davis & Baldwin
1100 IBM Bldg., 1200 5th Ave., Seattle WA 98101
(206) 624-7373

Wendy West Reed
Hillis, Phillips, Cairncross, Clark & Martin
403 Columbia St., Seattle WA 98104
(206) 623-1745

Counsel for Defendants
Charistine McKenna Moore, Ass't U.S. Attorney
3600 Seafirst 5th Ave. Plaza, 800 5th Ave., Seattle WA 98104
(206) 442-7970

James C. Kilbourne
Land and Natural Resources Division
Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 724-7354

Rothstein, J.

[OPINION OMITTED BY PUBLISHER IN ORIGINAL SOURCE]