Solida v. McKelvey
Decision Date | 04 May 2016 |
Docket Number | No. 13–16808.,13–16808. |
Citation | 820 F.3d 1090 |
Parties | Ministerio Roca SOLIDA, aka Solid Rock Ministry, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Sharon McKELVEY, Manager, Ash Meadows Wildlife Refuge, in her individual capacity, Defendant–Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General, Washington, D.C.; Daniel G. Bogden, United States Attorney, Las Vegas, NV; Michael S. Raab, and Lowell V. Sturgill, Jr. (argued), Civil Division, Appellate Staff, Washington, D.C., for Defendant–Appellant.
Joseph F. Becker (argued), NPRI Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff–Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:12–cv–01488–RCJ–VCF.
Before: M. MARGARET McKEOWN, JOHNNIE B. RAWLINSON, and BARRINGTON D. PARKER,* Circuit Judges.
McKEOWN
, Circuit Judge:
This interlocutory appeal addresses the question of whether a federal officer can be sued in her individual capacity for purely injunctive relief under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971)
. The unique, judicially-created Bivens remedy provides plaintiffs an avenue for damages against constitutional violations by federal officers. In this case, Ministerio Roca Solida (“Roca Solida”) seeks relief from the United States and from a federal officer for the allegedly unconstitutional diversion of a stream that once flowed through Roca Solida's church camp property. One sliver of the suit is a Bivens claim against United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”) officer Sharon McKelvey in her individual capacity. Through its Bivens action, Roca Solida seeks an injunction compelling McKelvey personally to restore the stream to its route through church property and a declaration that her actions violated Roca Solida's constitutional rights, but it does not seek damages against her. The district court denied the government's motion to dismiss, decided that the Bivens claim could proceed, and held that McKelvey was not protected by qualified immunity. Because Roca Solida seeks to compel official government action, and does not seek damages against McKelvey, we conclude that Roca Solida failed to state a Bivens claim against McKelvey in her individual capacity and we reverse.
Roca Solida is a non-profit religious organization that runs a church camp on a parcel of land in Nye County, Nevada. The camp is one of several privately owned parcels within the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge (the “Ash Meadows Refuge”), which historically included a large marsh that falls partially within the Carson Slough. The Slough, a unique and delicate ecosystem, was destroyed by peat-mining, ranching and crop production during the 1960s and 1970s. Since the federal government obtained the Ash Meadows Refuge land in the 1980s, the FWS has been attempting to restore the land to its natural condition. One aspect of the wildlife restoration projects has been to divert water sources previously used for irrigation back to natural channels that lead to the Carson Slough marsh.
Roca Solida purchased 40 acres of land within the boundaries of Ash Meadows in 2006 and built a church camp. A stream that found its source in the Carson Slough has allegedly traversed the property since at least 1881. The church camp used the stream for baptisms and other religious purposes, as well as for recreation and irrigation.
In 2010, Sharon McKelvey, Manager of the Ash Meadows Refuge, began a project to divert water from the stream. Roca Solida claims that the project diverted water into channels on higher ground outside the bounds of the church's property. Deprived of the water that once ran through its property, Roca Solida says it was unable to continue the religious and recreational activities that relied on the stream's water. As a consequence of the diversion, Roca Solida claims that the first measurable rainfall led the channels to overflow, causing at least $86,639 worth of damage to the church property.
Although Roca Solida sought equitable relief and monetary damages against all of the government defendants, including McKelvey, only the FTCA and Takings Clause claims allege money damages. McKelvey is not the appropriate defendant for either of these damages claims. Roca Solida conceded that Thus, Roca Solida seeks only declaratory and injunctive relief against McKelvey in her individual capacity, which is the subject of this appeal.1
McKelvey filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)
, arguing that Roca Solida had failed to present a cognizable and plausible claim against her individually under Bivens and that she was, in any event, entitled to qualified immunity. The district court denied McKelvey's motion to dismiss and held, without further clarification, that:
Two days after filing suit in the District of Nevada, Roca Solida also filed suit in the United States Court of Federal Claims under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491
, claiming damages against the United States in excess of $10,000. The Court of Federal Claims dismissed the suit without prejudice because “plaintiff had already filed a complaint against the United States in another court based on substantially the same operative facts.” Ministerio Roca Solida v. United States, 114 Fed.Cl. 571, 572 (2014), aff'd, 778 F.3d 1351 (Fed.Cir.2015), cert. denied sub nom.
Ministerio Roca Solida, Inc. v. United States, ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S.Ct. 479, 193 L.Ed.2d 349 (2015) (mem.). The Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal. Ministerio Roca Solida, 778 F.3d at 1353 (quoting United States v. Tohono O'Odham Nation, 563 U.S. 307, 131 S.Ct. 1723, 1727, 179 L.Ed.2d 723 (2011) ). In his concurrence, Judge Taranto raised concerns about the jurisdictional bars on Roca Solida's claims. Id. at 1357 ().2
In September of 2013, McKelvey filed an interlocutory appeal to challenge the denial of qualified immunity and, by necessity, the validity of the underlying Bivens cause of action brought against her in her individual capacity. See Wilkie v. Robbins, 551 U.S. 537, 549 n. 4, 127 S.Ct. 2588, 168 L.Ed.2d 389 (2007)
(. ) The individual-capacity claim against McKelvey is the subject of this appeal.
Analysis
This appeal begins and ends with the threshold question of whether a Bivens action can provide the injunctive and declaratory relief that Roca Solida seeks against McKelvey in her individual capacity. In answering no, we join our sister circuits in holding that relief under Bivens does not encompass injunctive and declaratory relief where, as here, the equitable relief sought requires official government action. See Higazy v. Templeton, 505 F.3d 161, 169 (2d Cir.2007)
(); see also Simmat v. U.S. Bureau of Prisons, 413 F.3d 1225, 1231 (10th Cir.2005)
().
In Bivens, the Supreme Court provided a judicially-created cause of action for damages arising out of constitutional violations by federal officers, holding that “petitioner is entitled to recover money damages for any injuries he has suffered as a result of the agents' violation of the [Fourth] Amendment.” 403 U.S. at 397, 91 S.Ct. 1999
(emphasis added). The Court explained that the remedy filled a gap in cases where sovereign immunity bars a damages action against the United States.
Carlson v. Green, 446 U.S. 14, 18, 100 S.Ct. 1468, 64 L.Ed.2d 15 (1980) ( ); Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 504, 98 S.Ct. 2894, 57 L.Ed.2d 895 (1978) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cox v. United States
...marks omitted). Thus, a Bivens suit can only proceed against a federal employee in an individual capacity. Solida v. McKelvey, 820 F.3d 1090, 1094 (9th Cir. 2016) ("By definition, Bivens suits are individual capacity suits and thus cannot [lie against] official government action."). And "a ......
-
Children's Health Def. v. Facebook Inc.
...relief. CHD's Opp'n to Facebook's Mtn. at 9. While CHD is correct that "money damages is the remedy under Bivens ," Solida v. McKelvey , 820 F.3d 1090, 1094 (9th Cir. 2016), claims for injunctive or declaratory relief based on a violation of the Constitution necessarily must be predicated o......
-
Hueter v. Kruse
...only a damages remedy against individual federal officers for actions undertaken in their individual capacity. Solida v. McKelvey , 820 F.3d 1090, 1094 (9th Cir. 2016) ("Bivens is both inappropriate and unnecessary for claims seeking solely equitable relief against actions by the federal go......
-
United States v. Sandwich Isles Commc'ns, Inc., Civ. No. 18-00145 JMS-RT
..."There is no such animal as a Bivens suit against a public official tortfeasor in his or her official capacity." Solida v. McKelvey , 820 F.3d 1090, 1094 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting Farmer v. Perrill , 275 F.3d 958, 963 (10th Cir. 2001) ). Rather, "[a]n action against an officer, operating in ......
-
The Unresolved Threshold Issues in the Emoluments Clauses Litigation: The President Has Three Bodies and There Is No Cause of Action for Ultra Vires Conduct
...injunctive relief in a ‘ Bivens type’ action” (quoting Ross v. Meese, 818 F.2d 1132, 1135 (4th Cir. 1987))). But cf. Solida v. McKelvey, 820 F.3d 1090, 1093–94 (9th Cir. 2016) (“holding that relief under Bivens does not encompass injunctive and declaratory relief where, as here, the equitab......