Ministerio Roca Solida v. McKelvey, No. 13-16808 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseIn this interlocutory appeal, Roca Solida filed suit seeking 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. Through its Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics action, Roca Solida seeks an injunction compelling Sharon 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. The court joined its 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. Bivens is both inappropriate and unnecessary for claims seeking solely equitable relief against actions by the federal government. In this case, only the United States - through its officers - has the power to take the action that Roca Solida seeks: returning the stream to its previous path through Roca Solida’s land. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded.
Court Description: Civil Rights. In an interlocutory appeal, the district court reversed the district court’s denial of defendants’ motion to dismiss an action, brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and remanded for further proceedings. Plaintiff, a non-profit religious organization that runs a church camp on a parcel of land in Nye County, Nevada, sought relief against the United States Fish and Wildlife Service officer Sharon McKelvey in her individual capacity for the allegedly unconstitutional diversion of a stream that once flowed through plaintiff’s church camp property. Plaintiff sought an injunction compelling McKelvey personally to restore the stream to its route through church property and a declaration that her actions violated plaintiff’s constitutional rights, but it did not seek damages against her. The panel held that relief under Bivens does not encompass injunctive and declaratory relief where the equitable relief sought requires official government action. The panel held that only the United States—through its officers—had the power to take the action that plaintiff sought: returning the stream to its previous path through plaintiff’s land. The panel held that Bivens was both inappropriate and unnecessary for claims seeking solely equitable relief against actions by the federal government. MINISTERIO ROCA SALIDA V. MCKELVEY 3
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.