A trial that could affect thousands of New Orleans residents whose homes were flooded after Hurricane Katrina began Monday at the New Orleans Federal Court.  The case – known as the MR-GO lawsuit – involves one business and five residents from New Orleans East, the lower Ninth Ward and St. Bernard Parish, who filed a suit against the United States Army Corps of Engineers for the storm surge that flooded homes allegedly caused by the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet after Hurricane Katrina. The suit claims flooding arose and led to the wipeout of St. Bernard Parish and the lower Ninth Ward because of poor designing and the Corps’ lack of proper maintenance for the channel that was built in the 1960s. And the case is an umbrella for many other cases involving lawsuits against the federal government for Katrina damage. If the New Orleans residents win the lawsuit, more than 120,000 other individuals, businesses and government entities could have a better shot at claiming billions of dollars in damages, according to the Associated Press.The lawsuit, which will decide if the Corps violated specific mandates for the MR-GO, began with arguments heard by Judge Stanwood Duval on Monday. The plaintiffs argue the United States violated federal law by not consulting federal and state agencies concerning the channel and violating policies mandating wetland policies.Led by federal trial lawyer Joseph Bruno, a team of lawyers and experts are seeking to hold the Corps responsible for “its decades-long mishandling of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet,” according to Bruno’s Web site.Bruno and his team were not available for comment Monday.The first day of the four-week trial did not include class-action allegations but included the first group of witnesses set to testify, according to court documents. The class action trial will not begin until July 30.G. Paul Kemp, one of the plaintiff’s expert witnesses, said the citizens began the trial today by giving their testimony. Each side has 50 hours to present its case, and at least six expert witnesses will present an argument for each side, Kemp explained.”[We are trying] to prove the government acted in an improper way and set the stage for disaster,” Kemp said.Ivor van Heerden, former coastal scientist at LSU, was originally asked to be one of the expert witnesses for the trial. But he declined because the University said they would fire him, van Heerden told The Daily Reveille on April 13. The Department of Justice is defending the Corps. According to court documents, the U.S. defends the Corps, saying it built the channel it was mandated to build, and a natural disaster destroyed the levees.”The Government further contends that it then maintained the channel in the mandated 36-foot depth and 500-foot width using due care,” the document read.Kemp said he was originally part of the state’s Team Louisiana, headed by van Heerden, which researched the channel’s affect on the flooding in New Orleans. After leaving the University, he has continued with his research to prove the channel had a large impact on the severity of the flooding.”If it’s a scientific argument . . . I think we will win,” he said.—-Contact Joy Lukachick@[email protected]