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 / Exxon Must Face Suit Over Climate Risks to its Mass. Facility, Judge Rules
Exxon Must Face Suit Over Climate Risks to its Mass. Facility, Judge Rules

Exxon Must Face Suit Over Climate Risks to its Mass. Facility, Judge Rules

March 14, 2019 Filed Under: Liability Litigation

print

By Dana Drugmand

A federal judge denied ExxonMobil’s motion to dismiss multiple climate change-related claims brought by Conservation Law Foundation. The foundation’s lawsuit, filed in 2016, alleges that Exxon violated the permit requirements for its oil storage terminal in Everett, Mass. by failing to consider the risk of imminent extreme weather events like flooding and storm surge.

The case, CLF v. ExxonMobil, will proceed after U.S. District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf ruled on Wednesday that most of the claims by CLF should not be dismissed. Those include the 10 counts that detail Exxon’s failure to take into account imminent risks from rising seas and extreme weather, especially risks related to climate change.  

The hearing on Wednesday in Boston followed one the judge held in November, after which he dismissed several other claims in the suit and ordered the parties to discuss Exxon’s Clean Water Act permit for the terminal with the Environmental Protection Agency. CLF subsequently amended its complaint to focus on the short-term climate-related hazards

Exxon’s terminal, located along the Mystic River just north of Boston, regularly discharges toxic pollutants above lawful levels, and CLF argues that a severe storm or flood poses a grave risk to the surrounding community and environment. According to its amended complaint, “the Terminal is likely to discharge and/or release pollutants into surrounding waters, groundwater, the community, and the air because it has not been designed to withstand flooding associated with storm events and storm surge, tides, sea level rise, and increasing sea surface temperatures.”

“Exxon has put vulnerable communities and the harbor at risk as part of its pattern and practice of deceiving regulators and the public about the risks of climate change,” said CLF President Bradley Campbell. “Exxon has known about these risks and its ongoing spills for years and is failing its most important duty under the law: to avoid spills of oil and hazardous substances that threaten public health and the environment.” 

Exxon’s attorney Daniel J. Toal argued that CLF’s claims were not supported by facts. “CLF hasn’t alleged any imminent injury due to climate change or severe weather events,” he said, adding that in the three years since the case was filed there have been no severe storm events impacting the terminal.

Wolf was not convinced by this argument, pointing to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration models showing the terminal lies in an area vulnerable to storm surge.

“CLF plausibly alleges that severe weather events pose an imminent risk to the terminal,” he said. He also explained that while the facility’s permit does not explicitly require consideration of climate risk, it does require Exxon abide by good engineering practices. He accepted CLF’s assertion that professional engineers working on large civil works projects routinely take climate change effects into account. “Therefore good engineering practices includes consideration of foreseeable extreme weather events such as those caused by climate change,” he said.

Exxon indicated it will seek a stay on the case and Wolf tentatively set a hearing date on that motion for May 14.

Campbell praised the judge’s ruling and said he is eager for the case to proceed to trial.

“Today’s decision brings us one step closer to safeguarding the families and businesses near the Mystic and Island End Rivers, protecting the public’s investment of billions for a clean Boston Harbor, and ensuring that Exxon is held accountable for years of risk-taking and law-breaking at the expense of public safety,” he said.

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: 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. Years of risk-taking and law-breaking at the expense of public safety | Rapid Shift says:
    March 14, 2019 at 2:51 pm

    […] Exxon Must Face Suit Over Climate Risks to its Mass. Facility, Judge Rules By Dana Drugmand […]

  2. Exxon must face suit over climate risks to Mass. facility, judge rules – Climate Liability News – Oil News says:
    March 14, 2019 at 8:25 pm

    […] Exxon must face suit over climate risks to Mass. facility, judge rules  Climate Liability News […]

  3. Exxon must face suit over climate risks to Mass. facility, judge rules – Climate Liability News – Oil Market Analysis says:
    March 14, 2019 at 8:43 pm

    […] Exxon must face suit over climate risks to Mass. facility, judge rules  Climate Liability News […]

  4. ExxonMobil to Face Hearing Over Failure to Consider Climate Risks - Citizen Truth says:
    March 22, 2019 at 10:03 am

    […] “CLF hasn’t alleged any imminent injury due to climate change or severe weather events,” Toal said. […]

  5. Hawaii leaders mull potential of climate liability cases says:
    May 17, 2019 at 9:55 am

    […] evidence has shown that fossil fuel companies, including ExxonMobil, knew about the detrimental effects […]

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

  • Climate Case Gets Green Light from European Union Court
  • Exxon Continues to Fund 'Science' Group Steeped in Climate Denial and Delay
  • Pacific Islands Group Pushes for International Court Ruling on Climate and Human Rights
  • Study Estimates Seawalls to Protect U.S. Coast Will Cost $400 Billion
  • BP Accused of 'Greenwashing' and Deceiving Public With Renewable Energy Ads

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.