District of Columbia v. Tri County Industries

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Frank J. Emig (on behalf of the Respondent)
Charles S. Reischel (on behalf of the Petitioner)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
99-1953
Petitioner: 
District of Columbia
Respondent: 
Tri County Industries
Opinion: 
531 U.S. 287 (2001)

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, District of Columbia v. Tri County Industries , 531 U.S. 287 (2001)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_99_1953)
Facts of the Case: 

Using a 1993 building permit issued by the District of Columbia, Tri County Industries, Inc. spent nearly $600,000 readying a site for a "soil remediation" facility, which would decontaminate soil tainted by hazardous wastes. After protests and a dispute over whether the company was violating its permit by storing contaminated soil on the site, the city issued a stop-work order. Tri County filed suit against the District of Columbia for suspending its building permit on the facility claiming its due process rights had been violated. Ultimately, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reinstated a 1998 jury's $5 million award. The appellate court rule that the District Court should have conducted a "more searching inquiry" than it had to preserve the Seventh Amendment right to jury trials in civil cases. The appellate court normally applies a "abuse of discretion" standard. Under the "more searching inquiry," the appellate court discounted the reasons the district judge had cited in ordering a new trial.

Question: 

Must federal appellate courts conduct a "more searching inquiry" than "abuse of discretion" when reviewing a federal trial court's decision to grant a new trial?

Conclusion: 

In a per curiam opinion, the Court dismissed the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted. The dismissal had the effect of leaving in place the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that new-trial grants demand a "more searching inquiry" than the usual abuse-of-discretion review and reinstating the appellate court's decision that upheld the first jury's verdict that awarded Tri County $5 million in damages.

Decisions

Decision: 9 votes for Tri County Industries, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision:

Sort by Seniority

Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Thomas

Per Curiam with Argument