Latest Headlines
- FDOT Plans Traffic Shift Thursday In Century Highway 29 Construction Zone
- Molino Man Charged With Throwing Object, Breaking Windshield Of Passing Car
- ECUA Considering Water, Sewer And Sanitation Rate Increases
- Highway 4, Highway 168 Bridges Across North Escambia Remain Closed. Here’s An Update.
- Free Summer Lunch Available For Youth At Libraries In Escambia County
- AAA: Florida Gas Prices Dropped 18 Cents In 10 Days
- Potential Sinking Of SS United States Under Consideration For Escambia County As Artificial Reef
- M-Braves Sweep Blue Wahoos
- Two-Time Super Bowl Champ Inspires Local Youth Athletes (With Photo Gallery)
- Century Woman Charged With Meth Possession After Traffic Stop
Attorney Wants New Trial In 2014 Dam Failure Flooding Lawsuit Against International Paper
May 2, 2019
An attorney for a class of Escambia County homeowners is asking three-judge 11th Circuit panel to order a new trial in a lawsuit that claimed International Paper was responsible for flooding in several neighborhoods.
In 2018, a federal court judge rule that International Paper was not negligent in its design, maintenance or continued operation of an abandoned dam near Kingsfield Road and that the company was not responsible for flood damage to scores of homes. The jury took a little more than an hour to return the verdict.
The class action lawsuit claimed the flooding of homes in several neighborhoods was caused by failure of the “Kingsfield Road Dam”, located on IP’s mill property in Cantonment. The suit was filed in federal court in Pensacola in 2014, with class action status granted in September 2017 on behalf of eight named and other real property owners and in the Bristol Park, Bristol Woods, Bristol Creek and Ashbury Hills subdivisions in Cantonment.
Attorney Athanasios Basdekis argued Tuesday that a FEMA application by Escambia County had prejudiced the jury, causing them to believe the homeowners had received government compensation. FEMA awarded Escambia County $2.4 million in June 2018 for flood protection improvements in the area, including the purchase of several properties.
NorthEscambia.com reached out to an International Paper spokesperson Wednesday afternoon for comment, but we did not hear back.
The Original Lawsuit
The original lawsuit claimed that on the night of a record rainfall, a large “swell” or “wave” of water breached and overflowed into Eleven Mile Creek, including the Bristol Park and Ashbury Hills subdivisions, Devine Farms Road and other surrounding areas, as a result of International Paper’s dam or levee. The residential areas are located in “Flood Zone X” on flood insurance maps, meaning they were not in special flood hazard areas and required no mandatory flood insurance.
The paper mill stopped using the dam to discharge wastewater in 2012, according to court documents.
The failure, the lawsuit asserted, was the result of IP’s negligence in maintaining the Eleven Mile Creek Dam and levee, failure to counteract continued development, failed to control debris buildup in and around the dam, and of a failure to notify those downstream of the potential or ultimate failure of the levee system.
The plaintiffs were seeking damages for loss and damage to personal and real property, diminished property values, loss of enjoyment, mental anguish, loss of income and additional expenses due to the flooding in the neighborhoods.
Pictured: Aerial photos provided to NorthEscambia.com in 2014 by plaintiff attorney J.J Talbott show what he said was the failure a dam and levee owned by International Paper that allowed flood waters to rush down Eleven Mile Creek. Photos for NorthEscambia.com, click to enlarge.
Comments
2 Responses to “Attorney Wants New Trial In 2014 Dam Failure Flooding Lawsuit Against International Paper”
REGARDING:
“It’s ridiculous to think they shouldn’t be responsible for what all those people went through that night.”
I don’t consider IP responsible for maintaining an abandoned dam.
I doubt they could have built a dam high enough to hold all that water.
I don’t see where IP should be considered responsible for telling people that building alongside a creek is risky.
I feel sorry for those who suffered, but that doesn’t automatically make anyone else at fault.
David for the uncommon thing called “common sense”
For anyone who thinks IP is not responsible just think of this. If IP no longer needed the damn/ levee system why did they not return the creek to its original flow. If they built it then it makes them negligent if they don’t maintain. It’s ridiculous to think they shouldn’t be responsible for what all those people went through that night. IP Should just pay the people for there loses and be thanking God that no one died that night.