Simmons v. Smith, No. 16-3899 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for NPS, in an action alleging violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 706, in establishing the boundaries of the Niobrara Scenic River Area (NSRA), both generally and with respect to his property. The court held that NPS engaged in a methodical, time-consuming boundary-drawing process, and it used the appropriate statutory standard to identify oustandingly remarkable values and it drew a boundary line that sought to protect those values. Furthermore, there was no evidence in the record that would lead the court to conclud that NPS subjected plaintiff to disparate treatment or acted in bad faith.
Court Description: {Kelly, Author, with Benton and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Administrative Procedures Act. In action alleging the National Park Service violated Section 706 of the Administrative Procedures Act in establishing the boundaries of the Niobrara Scenic River Area, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for the Park Service; the process the Park Service used in identifying land possessing outstanding remarkable values did not conflict with this court's directions in a prior challenge to the drawing of the boundaries in Sokol v. Kennedty, 210 F.3d 876 (8th Cir. 2000); the Park Service did not act arbitrarily and capriciously in setting the boundary on plaintiff's property; the record does not support plaintiff's theory that the boundaries were drawn out of personal animus towards him and there is no evidence that he was treated differently than any other affected property owner.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.