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 / California Climate Lawsuits / San Francisco, Oakland Appeal Dismissal of Climate Lawsuits
San Francisco, Oakland Appeal Dismissal of Climate Lawsuits

San Francisco, Oakland Appeal Dismissal of Climate Lawsuits

March 13, 2019 Filed Under: California Climate Lawsuits

print

By Karen Savage

San Francisco and Oakland have filed an appeal of a federal judge’s decision to throw out their climate liability lawsuits against five major oil companies. The lawsuits, dismissed last year, demanded the companies pay for the costs of sea walls and other infrastructure necessary to protect the cities from ongoing and future consequences of climate change.

In the appeal, which was filed Wednesday in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, San Francisco and Oakland contend that U.S. District Judge William Alsup mischaracterized their public nuisance claims. Alsup claimed the cities were seeking to  regulate greenhouse gas emissions. They contend that Alsup erred when he denied motions to remand the case to state court and further erred when deciding the court did not have jurisdiction over four of the defendants.

In the suit, initially filed in California state court in 2017, the cities allege that “production and promotion of massive quantities of fossil fuels” by BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon and Shell has caused—and is continuing to worsen—climate change-driven sea level rise, which endangers the lives of their residents.

The cities want the case heard in state court, where they were originally filed, because they believe they will have a better chance of succeeding under California’s strong public nuisance laws. Federal judges have long been reluctant to rule on climate change issues, ruling in several precedents that the matter should be left to the legislative and executive branches.

San Francisco city attorney Dennis Herrera said the companies should be liable for damages because they knowingly sold a product that now forces cities to spend billions of dollars on infrastructure, like seawalls and fortified storm water systems, to protect businesses and residents.

“Fossil fuel companies have known for decades about the direct link between their products and climate change,” Herrera said. “They intentionally hid that information and misled the public to maximize their profits. Right now, San Francisco and other coastal cities are paying the price of that deception.”

In his dismissal, Alsup said the problem of climate change is too vast in scope to hold just five companies liable and said solving the climate crisis is best left to the executive and legislative branches of government.

Alsup also said that the companies were not liable under a public nuisance claim because their conduct was not unreasonable and because everyone has benefitted from fossil fuels. He said that to allow the cities to seek compensation for damages was equivalent to regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

Herrera said the suit falls clearly under California public nuisance law and belongs in state court.

In their appeal, the cities reiterate that they are not seeking to regulate the companies, impose restrictions on their greenhouse gas emissions or stop the them from producing fossil fuels.

Herrera said the cities are going to do everything they can to ensure that the oil giants pay to fix the problem they created.

“These fossil fuel companies made money hand over fist, knowing they were putting our cities at risk. Now they want taxpayers to foot the bill while they walk away with the profits,” he said. “Not on our watch.”

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

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. Democratic state AGs rally behind San Francisco, Oakland climate suits says:
    March 20, 2019 at 11:19 pm

    […] San Francisco, Oakland Appeal Dismissal of Climate Lawsuits […]

  2. Companies face pressure to disavow trade group's anti-climate actions says:
    May 21, 2019 at 3:08 pm

    […] is facing climate liability suits in the U.S. for the damage its products have done to the climate and for failing to adequately plan for and protect its facilities from […]

  3. Oil industry supporters argue cities cannot sue for climate liability says:
    May 22, 2019 at 3:17 pm

    […] it to federal court and U.S. District Judge William Alsup dismissed the case in June 2018. The cities recently appealed Alsup’s ruling and submitted their brief in March, which was followed with a wide range of […]

  4. S.F., Oakland to Ninth Circuit: Our climate suits belong in state court says:
    July 3, 2019 at 1:59 pm

    […] cities maintain that Judge William Alsup improperly rejected the cities’ argument that their claims arise under […]

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

  • Colorado Judge Rejects Oil Companies’ Attempt to Move Climate Case
  • Biden’s DOJ Could Help Swing Momentum Around Climate Cases
  • Supreme Court Questions Oil Companies’ Tactics to Shake Climate Cases
  • Will Amy Coney Barrett, Whose Father Was a Shell Attorney for Decades, Recuse from Climate Suit?

Most Popular

  • Judge Agrees to Divest from Exxon Before New York's Climate Fraud Case
  • BP Accused of 'Greenwashing' and Deceiving Public With Renewable Energy Ads
  • Battling for Big Oil: Manufacturing Trade Group Leads Assault on Climate Suits
  • What Oil Companies Knew About Climate Change and When: A Timeline
  • Youth Climate Case in Washington State Dismissed by King County Judge

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.