• Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Global
  • Global Litigation
  • U.S. Litigation

Comer v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.

Filing Date: 2011
Case Categories:
  • Adaptation
    • Actions seeking money damages for losses
  • Common Law Claims
Principal Laws:
State Law—Trespass, State Law—Nuisance, State Law—Negligence, State Law—Tort Law
Description: Action seeking damages related to damages from Hurricane Katrina, refiled after 2010 dismissal by Fifth Circuit.
  • Comer v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.
    Docket number(s): 12-60291
    Court/Admin Entity: 5th Cir.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    05/14/2013 Opinion Download Opinion issued affirming dismissal. On May 14, 2013, the Fifth Circuit affirmed on res judicata grounds the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims. The Fifth Circuit rejected plaintiffs’ arguments that the district court’s 2007 judgment was not final or on the merits, noting that at no point in the appeals process for the 2007 judgment had the judgment been disturbed. The Fifth Circuit also refused plaintiffs’ request for an equitable exception to res judicata, invoking the “well-known rule that a federal court may not abrogate principles of res judicata out of equitable concerns.” The Fifth Circuit also held that the 2007 judgment was on the merits since res judicata principles applied to jurisdictional determinations.
  • Comer v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.
    Docket number(s): 1:11-cv-00220
    Court/Admin Entity: S.D. Miss.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    03/20/2012 Memorandum Opinion and Order Download Memorandum opinion and order issued granting motions to dismiss. A federal district court in Mississippi held that the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel barred claims for trespass, nuisance, and negligence against oil, coal, electric, and chemical companies for damages stemming from Hurricane Katrina. The court held that the lawsuit was nearly identical to the individuals’ 2005 lawsuit. The court also found that the plaintiffs lacked standing because their claims were not fairly traceable to the companies’ conduct, that the lawsuit presented a non-justiciable political question, that all of the claims were preempted by the Clean Air Act, that the claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that their injuries were proximately caused by the companies’ conduct.
    05/27/2011 Complaint Download Complaint filed. Plaintiffs refiled their climate change tort action alleging public and private nuisance, trespass, and
    negligence causes of action under Mississippi law.

© 2023 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law · U.S. Litigation Chart made in collaboration with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

The materials on this website are intended to provide a general summary of the law and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.