Description: Lawsuit seeking to hold fossil fuel companies liable for the impacts of climate change on the City of Charleston.
-
City of Charleston v. Brabham Oil Co.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 11/21/2022 Reply Download Supplemental reply filed by plaintiff in support of motion to remand to state court. 11/01/2022 Opposition Download Supplemental answering brief filed by defendants in opposition to plaintiff's renewed motion to remand. 09/27/2022 Brief Download Supplemental opening brief filed in support of motion to remand to state court. 08/31/2022 Order Motion to remand denied without prejudice as moot. 08/22/2022 Order Stay lifted and parties directed to submit renewed briefing. 07/11/2022 Status Report Download Joint status report filed summarizing proceedings and setting forth parties' positions on potential next steps. 05/27/2021 Order Download Proceedings stayed pending Fourth Circuit's decision on remand in the Baltimore case. On May 27, 2021, the federal district court for the District of South Carolina stayed proceedings in the City of Charleston’s lawsuit against fossil fuel companies pending the Fourth Circuit’s decision on remand in the Baltimore case. Briefing on the City of Charleston’s motion to remand was completed earlier in May. As set forth in a joint stipulation filed by the parties on May 25, the court directed them to file a joint submission regarding the next steps in the case within 14 days of the Fourth Circuit’s decision on remand. 05/25/2021 Stipulation Download Stipulation and proposed order to stay proceedings filed. -
City of Charleston v. Brabham Oil Co.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 09/09/2020 Complaint Download Complaint filed. Charleston Filed Suit Against Fossil Fuel Companies Alleging Their Responsibility for “Devastating” Climate Change Impacts. The City of Charleston filed an action in the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas against fossil fuel companies asserting that they are responsible for “devastating adverse” climate change impacts on Charleston and its residents. The alleged impacts included flooding, inundation, erosion, and beach loss due to sea level rise; “more frequent, longer-lasting and more severe” extreme weather events; and resulting social, economic, and other consequences. The conduct alleged to be a substantial factor in causing the impacts includes failure to warn of threats posed by fossil fuel products, wrongful promotion of fossil fuels and concealment of known hazards, “public deception campaigns designed to obscure the connection” between the defendants’ products and climate change, and failure to pursue less hazardous alternatives. The City asserted claims of public and private nuisance, strict liability for failure to warn, negligent failure to warn, and trespass, as well as violations of the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act. The City sought compensatory damages, treble damages under the Unfair Trade Practices Act, equitable relief, attorneys’ fees, punitive damages, disgorgement of profits, and costs of suit.