Description: Lawsuit seeking to recover climate change-related damages allegedly resulting from the defendant energy companies' production of fossil fuels and concealment of fossil fuels’ harms.
-
Chevron Corp. v. City of Hoboken
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/16/2022 Opposition Download Opposition filed by State of Delaware to application for extension of time. 12/16/2022 Order Application for extension of time granted. Justice Sotomayor granted fossil fuel companies’ application to extend their time for filing a petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals’ affirmance of remand orders in climate cases brought by the City of Hoboken and the State of Delaware. The new deadline is February 27, 2023. Delaware opposed the application, arguing that the extension would delay and prejudice the State 12/12/2022 Application Download Application for extension of time for filing petition for writ of certiorari submitted. -
City of Hoboken v. Chevron Corp.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 10/12/2022 Order Download Motion to stay the mandate denied. On October 12, 2022, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied fossil fuel industry defendants’ request that it stay issuance of the mandates after the court affirmed district court orders remanding climate change cases brought by the City of Hoboken and the State of Delaware to state court. The defendants had argued that issuance of the mandates should be stayed to allow the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court. 10/11/2022 Opposition Download Opposition filed by plaintiffs-appellees to defendants-appellants' motion to stay mandates. 10/04/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants regarding citation of supplemental authorities (Supreme Court invitation to Solicitor General to submit views on certiorari petition in Boulder case). In a letter to the Third Circuit in support of its motion to stay the mandates in the City of Hoboken’s and State of Delaware’s cases, the defendants argued that the Supreme Court’s invitation to the Solicitor General to submit the U.S.'s views on the certiorari petition in the Boulder case made clear that these jurisdictional questions were “substantial.” The defendants cited an article that found that certiorari petitions were more than 46 times more likely to be granted once the Court sought the Solicitor General’s views. The defendants also cited the position the United States had previously taken in amicus briefs in Baltimore’s case and the Oakland/San Francisco case that the plaintiffs’ climate change claims were “inherently and necessarily federal in nature.” 09/30/2022 Motion Download Motion to stay the mandates filed. 09/30/2022 Order Download Petition for rehearing denied. Third Circuit Denied Rehearing of Affirmance of Remand Orders in Hoboken and Delaware Climate Cases. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied fossil fuel industry defendants’ petition for rehearing of the court’s decision affirming the remand orders in climate change cases brought by the City of Hoboken and the State of Delaware. 09/14/2022 Petition for Rehearing Download Petition for rehearing en banc filed by defendants-appellants. The defendants-appellants filed a petition for rehearing en banc in which they contended that the Third Circuit panel erred by concluding that cases “that are necessarily federal by virtue of federal common law derived from the Constitution’s structure” were not removable. The defendants argued that the panel’s decision misinterpreted Third Circuit precedent, “deepened” a circuit split, and was at odds with the position of the United States and “the teachings of the Supreme Court.” The petition for rehearing also contended that that the panel erred in giving effect to Hoboken’s and Delaware’s “artful disclaimers” that the defendants said were “designed to evade federal jurisdiction.” 08/29/2022 Order Download Motion for extension of time to file petition for rehearing granted. The Third Circuit granted a motion to extend the time to file a petition for rehearing. The deadline is September 14, 2022. 08/17/2022 Opinion Download Remand order affirmed. Third Circuit Affirmed Orders Returning Hoboken and Delaware Climate Cases to State Courts. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed remand orders in climate change cases brought by the City of Hoboken and State of Delaware against fossil fuel industry defendants. The Third Circuit found “no federal hook” that would allow the defendants to remove the state tort law actions to federal court, rejecting arguments that the state law claims were inherently federal or necessarily raised a substantial federal issue or that the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act or federal officer removal statute provided a basis for federal jurisdiction. The Third Circuit stated that “[c]limate change is an important problem with national and global implications” but that “federal courts cannot hear cases just because they are important.” 06/21/2022 Not Available Oral argument heard. Oral Argument Held in Appeals of Delaware and Hoboken Remand Orders. On June 21, 2022, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in the appeals of remand orders in climate change lawsuits brought against fossil fuel industry defendants by the State of Delaware and City of Hoboken. 06/08/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants-appellants in response to plaintiff-appellee's citation of supplemental authority (First Circuit decision in Rhode Island case). 06/03/2022 Notification Oral argument on the merits of appeals in Delaware and City of Hoboken cases scheduled for June 21, 2022. 05/27/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by City of Hoboken regarding supplemental authorities (First Circuit decision in Rhode Island case). 05/06/2022 Letter Download Response filed by defendants to City of Hoboken's citation of supplemental authorities (Ninth Circuit decision in County of San Mateo case) 02/18/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants-appellants in response to plaintiff-appellee's citation of supplemental authorities (Tenth Circuit Decision in Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County case). 02/11/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by plaintiff-appellee to notify court of Tenth Circuit's decision in Board of County Commissions of Boulder County case. 01/14/2022 Reply Download Reply brief filed by defendants-appellants. 01/07/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by City of Hoboken regarding supplemental authority (Delaware remand order). 12/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by federal courts and foreign relations scholars as amici curiae supporting appellee and affirmance. 12/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by National League of Cities and U.S. Conference of Mayors as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellee. 12/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amicus curiae Natural Resources Defense Council in support of appellee and affirmance. 12/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amicus curiae City of New York in support of appellee City of Hoboken. 12/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by Delaware, 13 other states, and District of Columbia as amici curiae in support of appellee and affirmance. 12/15/2021 Brief Download Brief filed by plaintiff-appellee. 11/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amicus curiae the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America in support of appellants and vacatur. 11/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amici curiae General (Retired) Richard B. Myers and Admiral (Retired) Michael G. Mullen in support of defendants-appellants. Two former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff filed an amicus brief in support of the appellants. They argued that “important national and international policy issues” such as climate change should be addressed in federal courts. 11/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amici curiae National Association of Manufacturers et al. in support of appellants and reversal. 11/22/2021 Amicus Brief Download Amicus brief filed by Indiana and 15 other states in support of appellants and reversal. 11/15/2021 Brief Download Opening brief filed by defendants-appellants. On November 15, 2021, fossil fuel company defendants-appellants filed their opening brief in their appeal of the remand order in the climate change lawsuit brought by the City of Hoboken, New Jersey. The defendants argued that Hoboken’s claims were based on interstate and international emissions and therefore arise under common law, that removal was also proper because Hoboken’s claims necessarily raised disputed and substantial federal issues, and that the district court had jurisdiction under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act or the federal-officer removal statute. -
City of Hoboken v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 10/19/2022 Letter Download Clerk sent copy of remand order to Superior Court of New Jersey. 10/19/2022 Order Download Stay lifted and case remanded. Hoboken Case Returned to State Court. On October 19, the federal district court in New Jersey ordered that Hoboken’s case be remanded to state court. 12/15/2021 Order Download Motion to stay execution of remand order pending appeal granted. New Jersey Federal Court Stayed Remand Order in Hoboken’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Industry Defendants. On December 15, 2021, the federal district court for the District of New Jersey granted fossil fuel industry defendants’ motion to stay its order remanding the City of Hoboken’s climate change case to state court. Although the district court found that the defendants did not make a strong showing that they were likely to succeed on the merits of their appeal in the Third Circuit and therefore failed to establish that a stay pending appeal was warranted, the court concluded that factors such as consideration of judicial economy and conservation of resources favored granting a stay using the court’s inherent power to control its own docket. 10/12/2021 Reply Download Reply brief filed in support of defendants' joint motion to stay execution of remand order pending appeal. 10/04/2021 Memorandum of Law Download Memorandum of law filed by plaintiff in opposition to defendants' motion to stay execution of remand order pending appeal. 09/22/2021 Brief Download Brief filed in support of defendants' joint motion to stay execution of remand order pending appeal. 09/22/2021 Motion Download Joint motion to stay execution of remand order pending appeal filed by defendants. 09/14/2021 Notice of Appeal Download Notice of appeal filed by defendants. 09/09/2021 Letter Download Defendants submitted letter in response to plaintiff's opposition to emergency request to stay remand order. 09/09/2021 Order Download Court temporarily stayed execution of remand order. 09/08/2021 Letter Download Defendants filed emergency request to stay remand order. 09/08/2021 Letter Download Plaintiff submitted letter opposing defendants' request for emergency stay. 09/08/2021 Opinion Download Motion to remand granted and defendants' motion to strike denied. New Jersey Federal Court Remanded Hoboken’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies to State Court. A federal district court in New Jersey granted the City of Hoboken’s motion to remand to state court its climate change lawsuit against oil and gas companies. As a threshold matter, the court found that it would not be prudent to wait for federal courts of appeal to issue decisions in fossil fuel companies’ appeals of remand orders in other climate change cases. The court noted that it had no indication of when the courts of appeal would address the issues and, “[c]ritically,” that no such appeal was pending in the Third Circuit. On the merits of removal, the court first found that none of the exceptions to the well-pleaded complaint rule applied. The court held that the City’s claims were not completely preempted by the Clean Air Act and also was not persuaded by the companies’ argument that the claims necessarily arose under federal common law. The court found that, as pled, the complaint was “premised solely on state law” and that City of New York v. Chevron Corp.—in which the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of New York City’s climate change case against oil and gas companies—“merely suggests that Defendants may ultimately prevail with their federal preemption defense argument,” not that there was a basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction. The New Jersey court also found no basis for Grable jurisdiction, rejecting the companies’ arguments that the City’s claims necessarily raised substantial and actually disputed issues of federal law such as First Amendment issues or issues addressed by federal environmental statutes. The court also found that the “chain of causation” between the defendants’ activities on the outer continental shelf and the City’s claims was “too attenuated” for the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to provide a basis for jurisdiction. In addition, the court rejected the federal-officer removal statute, federal enclave jurisdiction, and the Class Action Fairness Act as grounds for removal. 04/15/2021 Notice Download Plaintiffs filed notice of supplemental authority and response to defendants' notice. In Hoboken’s case, the City argued that the Second Circuit itself had said that it was addressing a different question than the removability question at issue in a motion for remand. Hoboken also noted the district court’s decision in Minnesota v. American Petroleum Institute and a decision by the Central District of California as recent cases that had recently joined “the ever-growing chorus of courts” rejecting the defendants’ arguments for removal. 04/12/2021 Reply Download Reply brief filed in support of defendants' motion to strike new arguments in plaintiff's reply in support of its motion to remand. 04/09/2021 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by defendants. Fossil fuel company defendants filed notices about the Second Circuit decision's affirming dismissal of New York City's climate change case in cases where motions to remand were pending, including in cases brought by the District of Columbia, City of Hoboken, City of Oakland, and City and County of San Francisco. The defendants argued that the Second Circuit’s decision confirmed that the plaintiff’s claims necessarily arise under federal law. The defendants also argued that the decision supported their other grounds for federal jurisdiction, including the federal officer removal statute, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, federal enclave jurisdiction, and Grable jurisdiction. 04/06/2021 Opposition Download Memorandum filed by plaintiff in opposition to defendants' motion to strike. 03/17/2021 Motion Download Motion filed by defendants to strike new arguments in plaintiff's reply in support of its motion to remand. In the City of Hoboken’s case against fossil fuel companies, the companies filed a motion on March 17, 2021 to strike arguments regarding collateral estoppel and a request for fees in Hoboken’s reply because they were raised for the first time. 02/26/2021 Reply Download Reply memorandum filed by plaintiff in support of its motion to remand. 01/29/2021 Opposition Download Opposition filed to motion to remand. 12/11/2020 Memorandum of Law Download Memorandum of law filed in support of motion to remand. 11/05/2020 Motion Download Motion for remand filed by City of Hoboken. 10/09/2020 Notice of Removal Download Notice of removal filed. -
City of Hoboken v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 09/02/2020 Complaint Download Complaint filed. Hoboken Filed Suit Seeking Damages from Energy Companies for Climate Change Impacts. The City of Hoboken, New Jersey filed a lawsuit in state court asserting climate change-based claims for damages and injunctive relief against energy companies and the American Petroleum Institute. The City alleged that the defendants caused climate change-related harms through production of fossil fuels and concealment of fossil fuels’ harms. The complaint alleged that Hoboken is “uniquely vulnerable to sea level rise” and that the city was experiencing more frequent and severe storms as a result of climate change. In response to these impacts, Hoboken alleged that it had developed an adaptation and mitigation plan to address rainfall and seawater flooding that would cost more than $500 million. The complaint asserted claims of public and private nuisance, trespass, negligence, and violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. The relief sought included compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages; treble damages under the Consumer Fraud Act; an order compelling the defendants to abate the alleged nuisance and to pay costs of abatement; an order enjoining future acts of trespass; and attorneys’ fees and costs.