The Climate Docket

WHAT WE COVER:

  • Liability Litigation
    • Baltimore Lawsuit
    • California Climate Lawsuits
    • Colorado Lawsuit
    • Mass. v. Exxon
    • New York City Lawsuit
    • Rhode Island Lawsuit
    • Other Suits
  • Access to Courts
    • Liability Waivers
    • State Legislation
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Powered by Genesis

You are here: Home / Liability Litigation / Three California Climate Suits Sent Back to State Court
Three California Climate Suits Sent Back to State Court

Three California Climate Suits Sent Back to State Court

March 17, 2018 Filed Under: California Climate Lawsuits, Liability Litigation

print
By Dana Drugmand

A federal judge sent a set of California climate liability lawsuits back to state court on Friday. The decision, by U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, conflicts with Judge William Alsup’s order in late February denying remand for similar lawsuits brought by Oakland and San Francisco.

The counties of Marin and San Mateo and the city of Imperial Beach filed suit in July against 37 fossil fuel companies for their role in contributing to sea level rise that is damaging those communities. San Francisco and Oakland followed in September with their own lawsuits against five large oil companies. Defendants moved to shift both sets of cases to federal court, a strategic move based on the failures of previous climate lawsuits brought under federal common law. Plaintiffs then moved to remand back to California state court, with two separate hearings held in February.

Chhabria had expressed skepticism towards the fossil fuel industry arguments in his hearing of the San Mateo, San Marin and Imperial Beach cases, then rejected their positions in this ruling.

Unlike Alsup, Chhabria disagreed with the defendants’ chief argument that federal common law should apply in these cases. The two judges differed in their comparisons of the current California lawsuits to that of Native Village of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil et al. Judge Alsup determined that Kivalina sought damages from domestic emitters, while the California plaintiffs “bring claims against defendants for having put fossil fuels into the flow of international commerce.”

But Chhabria reasoned that the California cases are not distinct from Kivalina.

“Like the localities in the current cases, the Kivalina plaintiffs sought damages resulting from rising sea levels and land erosion,” he wrote in his order. “Not coincidentally, there is significant overlap between the defendants in Kivalina and the defendants in the current cases.” Because the Kivalina decision held that the Clean Air Act displaces the federal common law nuisance claim, Chhabria said, federal common law cannot govern the current nuisance claims.

“Kivalina stands for the proposition that federal common law is not just displaced when it comes to claims against domestic sources of emissions but also when it comes to claims against energy producers’ contributions to global warming and rising sea levels…Simply put, these cases should not have been removed to federal court on the basis of federal common law that no longer exists,” Chhabria wrote.

He also determined that state courts are capable of deciding ordinary preemption questions, and that complete preemption does not apply here.

“It may even be that these local actions are federally preempted,” Chhabria wrote. “But to justify removal from state court to federal court, a defendant must be able to show that the case being removed fits within one of a small handful of small boxes. Because these lawsuits do not fit within any of those boxes, they were properly filed in state court and improperly removed to federal court.”

Chhabria issued a 42-day stay on the remand order in order to consider defendants’ rights to appeal, but did call their right to appeal based on a narrow claim related to federal officer jurisdiction “dubious.”

“While we expect these big fossil fuel corporations and their lawyers to keep trying to delay and distract from the merits of our case, we look forward to moving to trial so our communities can pursue the accountability and justice they are due,” San Mateo County and Marin County officials said in a joint statement following the ruling.

Chhabria will also decide whether to remand similar lawsuits filed by Santa Cruz County and the cities of Santa Cruz and Richmond. A remand hearing for those cases is scheduled for March 29.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: California Climate Lawsuits, Liability Litigation

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Trackbacks

  1. In judge's climate tutorial, Big Oil doubles down on science 'uncertainty' says:
    March 22, 2018 at 10:48 am

    […] Three California Climate Suits Sent Back to State Court […]

  2. New Canadian bill would help cities sue oil industry for climate damages says:
    March 26, 2018 at 2:17 pm

    […] Three California Climate Suits Sent Back to State Court […]

  3. The Banner, Vol. 4, No. 12 – You're Drinking Your Shirt - The Banner says:
    March 27, 2018 at 4:03 pm

    […] for having put fossil fuels into the flow of international commerce.”…—Dana Drugmand, “Three California climate suits sent back to state court,” Climate Liability News, […]

  4. Mobil chief acknowledged climate change issue 20 years ago says:
    April 3, 2018 at 1:30 pm

    […] Three California Climate Suits Sent Back to State Court […]

  5. Federal judge to decide fate of NYC climate lawsuit says:
    June 13, 2018 at 5:25 pm

    […] also pointed out the conflicting rulings by two federal judges in two sets of climate cases in California earlier this year. One of them, […]

  6. Federal judge dismisses San Francisco, Oakland climate suits says:
    June 26, 2018 at 8:59 am

    […] and state courts across the country. Suits by three other California communities were recently remanded to state court. A federal judge in New York recently heard oil company arguments for dismissal of New York […]

  7. After dismissal of San Francisco, Oakland climate suits, what lies ahead? says:
    June 27, 2018 at 10:18 pm

    […] came to the opposite conclusion in ordering that a similar set of California climate lawsuits be sent back to state court. Judge Vince Chhabria reasoned that climate change tort claims should be pursued under state, not […]

  8. Why a Supreme Court ruling on lead paint could impact climate cases says:
    November 13, 2018 at 10:22 am

    […] Court of Appeals in a group of California climate liability suits so crucial. The cases were ordered back to state court in March, but the defendants appealed and that appeal is […]

  9. States, organizations, scientists urge keeping climate suits in state court says:
    January 31, 2019 at 10:59 am

    […] Cruz, and Imperial Beach, had been filed in California court and U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled they should be tried there, but the companies being sued appealed to move them to federal court. The cases were consolidated […]

  10. Climate change lawsuits: why kids, cities, farmers, and fishermen are suing | Micro ABC XYZ says:
    February 22, 2019 at 9:35 am

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  11. Pay attention to the growing wave of climate change lawsuits – Latest Online News Website says:
    February 22, 2019 at 9:37 am

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  12. Blog: Pay attention to the growing wave of climate change lawsuits – Nur die Kirschen says:
    February 22, 2019 at 9:39 am

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  13. Climate change lawsuits: why kids, cities, farmers, and fishermen are suing – Vox – Grandchildren’s Fund for a Fossil Fuel Free Future says:
    February 22, 2019 at 12:38 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  14. Climate change lawsuits: why kids, cities, farmers, and fishermen are suing | says:
    February 22, 2019 at 1:21 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  15. Climate change lawsuits: why kids, cities, farmers, and fishermen are suing - The Latest World News says:
    March 26, 2019 at 3:00 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  16. Pay attention to the growing wave of climate change lawsuits - NewsCatch says:
    March 26, 2019 at 3:16 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  17. Local weather change lawsuits: why youngsters, cities, farmers, and fishermen are suing | InfoFisher says:
    March 26, 2019 at 4:47 pm

    […] other federal decide on the identical courtroom, Vince Chhabria, despatched local weather lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties in addition to the town of […]

  18. Pay attention to the growing wave of climate change lawsuits | vincent idele's blog says:
    March 26, 2019 at 8:07 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  19. Pay attention to the growing wave of climate change lawsuits – AVConnecting says:
    March 31, 2019 at 11:07 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  20. Pay attention to the growing wave of climate change lawsuits | says:
    April 10, 2019 at 4:24 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  21. Pay attention to the growing wave of climate change lawsuits – Valerian's Realm says:
    April 14, 2019 at 5:16 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  22. Hearing glosses over carbon tax proposal's liability waiver says:
    May 16, 2019 at 9:09 am

    […] companies. Marin, along with the county of San Mateo and the city of Imperial Beach, Calif. filed sued 37 companies in 2017 seeking compensation for climate […]

  23. Climate change lawsuits: why kids, cities, farmers, and fishermen are suing – Vox – Wine And Water Watch says:
    June 5, 2019 at 7:55 pm

    […] federal judge at the same court, Vince Chhabria, sent climate lawsuits filed by Marin and San Mateo counties as well as the city of Imperial Beach […]

  24. Mayors: Cities should not be left alone to foot the bill for climate costs says:
    June 17, 2019 at 9:52 am

    […] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as the fossil fuel companies challenge a federal judge’s decision to remand the suits back to state court. San Francisco and Oakland also have climate lawsuits awaiting appeal […]

  25. Mayors, cities rally in support of Baltimore climate suit says:
    September 3, 2019 at 9:12 pm

    […] of Marin, San Mateo and Santa Cruz, along with the cities of Imperial Beach, Santa Cruz and Richmond won an earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, who decided the suits belong in state […]

  26. Big Oil: Dismissal of Kids Climate Case Should Doom All Climate Cases says:
    May 31, 2020 at 11:04 pm

    […] counties of Marin, San Mateo and Santa Cruz. Fossil fuel companies in those suits are appealing a decision by a U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria to remand the cases back to state […]

  27. Baltimore argues climate case should proceed as oil companies appeal says:
    June 4, 2020 at 3:17 pm

    […] Marin, San Mateo and Santa Cruz, along with the cities of Imperial Beach, Santa Cruz and Richmond won an earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, who decided the suits belong in state […]

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Latest News

Justice Dept. to Argue on Side of Oil Companies in Supreme Court Hearing

By Karen Savage The acting solicitor general will be allowed time to argue in support of ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and nearly two dozen other companies next week during oral arguments before … [Read More...]

Recent Posts

  • Will Amy Coney Barrett, Whose Father Was a Shell Attorney for Decades, Recuse from Climate Suit?
  • Justice Dept. to Argue on Side of Oil Companies in Supreme Court Hearing
  • Oil Companies Ask Supreme Court to Decide Jurisdiction of More Climate Cases
  • Climate Suits Grew in 2020, Could Clear Huge Hurdle in 2021

Most Popular

  • Will Amy Coney Barrett, Whose Father Was a Shell Attorney for Decades, Recuse from Climate Suit?
  • Hawaii Joins Trend: Recognizes Constitutional Right to Safe Climate and Environment
  • R.I. Wins Battle to Keep Climate Suit Vs. Big Oil in State Court
  • Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules
  • As San Francisco, Oakland Press Climate Cases, They Pay Homage to Tiny Kivalina

Categories

  • Access to Courts
  • Baltimore Lawsuit
  • California Climate Lawsuits
  • Charleston, S.C. Lawsuit
  • Colorado Lawsuit
  • Connecticut Lawsuit
  • Delaware Lawsuit
  • Exxon Climate Investigation
  • Featured
  • Hoboken Lawsuit
  • International
  • Latest News
  • Liability Litigation
  • Liability Waivers
  • Mass. v. Exxon
  • Minnesota Lawsuit
  • New York City Lawsuit
  • Other Suits
  • Politics
  • Rhode Island Lawsuit
  • State Legislation
  • Uncategorized
  • Washington DC Lawsuit

Follow us

  • View climatedocket’s profile on Facebook
  • View climatedocket’s profile on Twitter

RSS

RSS Feed RSS - Posts

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.