Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Building Industry Ass'n of Southern California, Inc. v. Lujan
Citations: 785 F. Supp. 1020; 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2117; 1992 WL 51315Docket: Civ. A. 90-882
Court: District Court, District of Columbia; February 27, 1992; Federal District Court
The Building Industry Association of Southern California, Inc. filed a lawsuit against Manuel Lujan, Jr. and others to challenge the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's final rule designating the Mojave Desert population of the desert tortoise as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The final rule was issued on April 2, 1990, and the plaintiff's complaint was filed shortly thereafter on April 13, 1990. The defendants moved to dismiss the case, asserting that the plaintiff failed to comply with the ESA's requirement of providing a 60-day written notice before filing suit. The court concurred, citing the ESA's citizen suit provisions which stipulate that no legal action can commence until after the notice period has elapsed. The court referenced a similar ruling in Hallstrom v. Tillamook County, affirming the necessity of adhering to statutory notice requirements to allow the Secretary to address concerns raised. The plaintiff argued that its involvement in a prior lawsuit regarding the emergency listing of the desert tortoise constituted sufficient notice. The court rejected this argument, stating that the purpose of the notice requirement is to provide the Secretary an opportunity to respond, which was not fulfilled. The court emphasized that the ESA's provisions mirror those in Hallstrom and that failure to meet the notice requirement mandated dismissal of the action, regardless of the case's lengthy litigation history. As a result, the court ordered the dismissal of the case without prejudice, indicating that the plaintiff may refile in compliance with the statutory requirements. Additionally, the court clarified that the plaintiff could not establish jurisdiction under the Administrative Procedure Act as an independent basis for the lawsuit without complying with the ESA's citizen suit provisions. The court did not address other arguments raised by either party due to the dismissal.