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 / Latest News / Exxon Calls Shareholder Climate Lawsuit ‘Without Merit,’ Seeks Dismissal

Exxon Calls Shareholder Climate Lawsuit ‘Without Merit,’ Seeks Dismissal

August 13, 2020 Filed Under: Latest News, Liability Litigation

print

By Karen Savage

ExxonMobil wants a shareholder lawsuit filed against it thrown out.

The shareholders allege that current and former Exxon executives and board members failed to protect their investments and the company from the risks of climate change. Two similar cases Von Colditz v. Woods, et al, and Montini v. Woods, et al, were consolidated into this single action by a federal court judge in Texas last year. It is a derivative suit, which allows shareholders to sue on behalf of themselves and the corporation.

But the oil giant now argues that because it is incorporated in New Jersey, that state’s law should apply and an internal investigation showed the claims to be false.

“Dismissal is required where, as here, a majority of the board’s independent directors has determined in good faith, on the basis of a reasonable inquiry, that derivative litigation is not in the corporation’s best interests,” Exxon attorneys Daniel J. Kramer and Nina Cortell wrote in a motion to dismiss, which was filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas division.

Exxon told the court that it assembled a working group composed of board members, who with guidance from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, a New York law firm, investigated the shareholders’ claims and found them to be “entirely without merit.”

Exxon says the finding is consistent with that of former Simpson Thacher & Bartlett partner and current New York Supreme Court Judge Barry Ostrager, who in December ruled that the New York attorney general’s office failed to prove that Exxon deceived investors after a 12-day trial.

Derivative suits often arise when fraud, mismanagement or dishonesty is ignored by a corporation’s officers and the board of directors.

In this case, shareholders allege Exxon violated federal securities law, breached fiduciary duties and wasted corporate assets by not disclosing what they knew about climate change.  Chief executive Darren Woods and his predecessor, Rex Tillerson, are named in the suit.,

“Exxon has a well-documented history of intentionally misleading the public concerning global climate change and its connection to fossil fuel usage, as well as the impact the changing climate will have on Exxon’s reserve values and long-term business prospects,” shareholder Samuel Montini said in an amended complaint filed in September.

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: Latest News, 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. Investors: Exxon's 'Self Investigation' Shouldn't Sink Their Lawsuit - The Climate Docket says:
    September 8, 2020 at 8:35 pm

    […] Birmingham Retirement and Relief System—argue that if the Texas case is dismissed with prejudice, as Exxon has requested, it could result in the dismissal of their […]

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
  • Carbon Majors Can Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations, Philippines Commission Rules
  • R.I. Wins Battle to Keep Climate Suit Vs. Big Oil in State Court
  • Study Estimates Seawalls to Protect U.S. Coast Will Cost $400 Billion

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.