Description: Lawsuit filed by the District of Columbia against oil and gas companies for allegedly violating the Consumer Protection Procedures Act by misleading consumers about “the central role their products play in causing climate change.”
-
District of Columbia v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 05/25/2022 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by District of Columbia (First Circuit decision in Rhode Island case). 05/19/2022 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by District of Columbia (Fourth Circuit decision in Baltimore case). 03/01/2022 Response Download Response filed by defendants to attorney general's notice of supplemental authority (Boulder case). 02/15/2022 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority (Tenth Circuit affirmance of remand order in Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County) and request for a status conference filed by the District of Columbia. 01/20/2022 Response Download Response filed by defendants to plaintiff's notice of supplemental authority regarding federal-officer removal. 01/14/2022 Response Download Response filed by defendants to plaintiff's notice of supplemental authority (remand order in Delaware case). 01/11/2022 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority regarding federal-officer removal filed by plaintiff. 01/06/2022 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by District of Columbia regarding remand order in Delaware's case. 09/17/2021 Response Download Response filed by defendants to District of Columbia's notice of supplemental authority regarding City of Hoboken v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 09/09/2021 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by District of Columbia regarding City of Hoboken v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 04/15/2021 Response Download Response to defendants' notice of supplemental authority filed by plaintiffs. The District of Columbia argued that the Second Circuit’s opinion addressed a different issue than the issue before the court; that the Second Circuit expressly distinguished the “fleet” of climate cases in which federal courts had granted remand; and that D.C.’s case would be distinguishable in any event because it was based on a statutory consumer protection claim. 04/09/2021 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by defendants. Fossil fuel company defendants filed notices about the Second Circuit's decision affirming dismissal of New York City's climate change case in cases where motions to remand are 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. 10/15/2020 Opposition Download Brief filed by defendants in opposition to District of Columbia's motion to remand. 08/17/2020 Motion Download Motion to remand filed by District of Columbia. 07/17/2020 Notice of Removal Download Notice of removal filed. Fossil Fuel Defendants Removed Three More Climate Cases to Federal Court. Fossil fuel companies removed a climate change-based consumer protection case brought by Washington, D.C. to federal court. The defendants asserted multiple grounds for removal: that the cases raise disputed and substantial federal questions, that the claims necessarily arise under federal common law, that the claims arise out of federal enclaves, that federal-officer removal applies, that jurisdiction is proper under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, that the case is removable under the Class Action Fairness Act, and that diversity citizenship creates removal jurisdiction. -
District of Columbia v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 06/25/2020 Complaint Download Complaint filed. D.C. Filed Suit Against Oil and Gas Companies Alleging Violations of Consumer Protection Law. The District of Columbia filed a lawsuit asserting claims under its Consumer Protection Procedures Act (CPPA) against oil and gas companies in D.C. Superior Court. The District alleged that the companies had engaged in “deceptive and unfair conduct” in violation of the CPPA by misleading consumers about “the central role their products play in causing climate change, one of the greatest threats facing humanity.” The complaint alleged that D.C. had had to develop a heat emergency plan to address an increased number of extreme heat days, that D.C. was experiencing “more frequent and extreme precipitation events and associated flooding,” and that impacts were particularly severe in low-income communities and communities of color. The District asked the court to enjoin the defendants from violating the CPPA and to order them to pay restitution or damages, civil penalties, and costs and attorney’s fees.