Description: State of Rhode Island lawsuit seeking to hold fossil fuel companies liable for causing climate change impacts that adversely affect Rhode Island and jeopardize State-owned or -operated facilities, real property, and other assets.
-
Shell Oil Products Co. v. Rhode Island
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 04/24/2023 Order List Download Petition for writ of certiorari denied. Supreme Court Denied Fossil Fuel Companies’ Requests for Certiorari on Jurisdictional Issues in State and Local Government Climate Cases. On April 24, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court denied fossil fuel industry defendants’ petitions for writ of certiorari seeking review of decisions affirming remand orders that sent climate change cases brought by state and local governments back to state courts. The fossil fuel companies had asked the Court to consider whether there was federal jurisdiction over state-law claims seeking redress for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate or transboundary greenhouse gas emissions on the global climate because federal common law necessarily governs such claims. Justice Alito did not participate in the consideration of or decision on the petitions. 02/22/2023 Reply Download Reply brief filed by plaintiffs. Briefing was completed for the petition for writ of certiorari in Rhode Island’s case on February 22, 2023. The case originally was distributed for the justices’ conference on March 17, but it was rescheduled on February 27. A new date was not set. 02/06/2023 Brief Download Brief filed by respondent. 01/05/2023 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amicus curiae Energy Policy Advocates in support of the petitioners. Two amicus briefs were filed in support of fossil fuel companies’ petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the remand order in Rhode Island’s climate case. Energy Policy Advocates contended that records it had obtained under the Rhode Island Access to Public Records Act showed that the lawsuit was an improper attempt to make climate change policy through the courts. 01/05/2023 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amicus curiae National Association of Manufacturers in support of petitioners. A National Association of Manufacturers amicus brief argued that climate change litigation must be heard in federal courts. 11/30/2022 Petition for Writ of Certiorari Download Petition for writ of certiorari filed. Certiorari Petition Filed Requesting Review of Jurisdictional Issues.. Fossil fuel companies filed a petition for writ of certiorari seeking the Supreme Court’s review of the First Circuit's decision affirming the remand of Rhode Island's case to state court. The fossil fuel companies presented the following question: “Whether a federal district court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 over nominally state-law claims seeking redress for injuries allegedly caused by the effect of transboundary greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate, on the ground that federal law necessarily and exclusively governs such claims.” -
Rhode Island v. Shell Oil Products Co.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 07/07/2022 Order Download Petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc denied. First Circuit Denied Rehearing on Affirmance of Remand Order in Rhode Island Climate Case. On July 7, 2022, the First Circuit Court of Appeals denied fossil fuel companies’ petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc of the First Circuit’s affirmance of the district court’s remand of Rhode Island’s climate case to state court. 06/28/2022 Amicus Brief Download Amicus brief filed by Indiana and 15 other states in support of appellants' petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc. 06/21/2022 Petition for Rehearing Download Petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc filed. Fossil fuel companies filed a petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc of the First Circuit’s affirmance of the district court’s remand of Rhode Island’s climate case to state court. The companies first argued that the First Circuit was at odds with “a mostly unbroken string of cases” applying federal law to interstate air pollution disputes. The companies also argued that the First Circuit panel had confused the effect of the Clean Air Act’s displacement of federal common law of interstate pollution. The defendants contended that the displacement was of any remedy under federal common law, not displacement of the “exclusively federal source of law.” They further argued that the First Circuit’s consideration of this issue was at odds with First Circuit precedent, other circuits’ decisions, the position of the United States, and Supreme Court decisions. 05/23/2022 Opinion Download Remand order affirmed. First Circuit Affirmed Remand Order in Rhode Island’s Climate Case Against Energy Companies. The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court order remanding Rhode Island’s climate change case against energy companies to state court. The First Circuit noted that this was its “second pass at a climate-change case that requires us to explore the mind-numbing complexities of federal removal jurisdiction.” In 2021, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded the First Circuit’s 2020 affirmance of the remand order after determining in the Baltimore case that federal appellate courts have jurisdiction to consider appeals on all grounds for removal when the federal-officer removal statute is one basis for removal. In reviewing the other grounds for removal in Rhode Island’s case, the First Circuit “lean[ed] hard on our sibling circuits’ analyses in comparable climate-change cases,” and agreed with the other courts’ conclusions that there was no federal jurisdiction over Rhode Island’s claims, which the court characterized as seeking to hold the companies liable for climate change-related harms allegedly caused by the companies “deliberately misrepresenting the dangers they knew would arise from their deceptive hyping of fossil fuels.” First, the First Circuit found that even if the well-pleaded complaint rule did not prevent the court from finding that Rhode Island’s state-law claims were necessarily federal common law claims, the companies “cannot premise removal on a federal common law that no longer exists.” The First Circuit said that even if control of interstate pollution, promotion of energy independence, and negotiation of treaties addressing climate change were “uniquely federal interests,” the companies did not satisfy the second requirement for creating federal common law—that there be a “significant conflict … between some federal policy or interest and the use of state law.” The First Circuit also said that even if the companies had not failed to make a showing of a significant conflict, statutes—the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act—had displaced any federal common law that previously existed. Second, the First Circuit found that there was no Grable jurisdiction because the companies did not establish that a federal issue was a necessary element of any of Rhode Island’s state-law claims. Third, the First Circuit rejected the argument that the Clean Air Act completely preempted Rhode Island’s claims. Fourth, the court found that federal enclave jurisdiction did not apply since Rhode Island specifically avoided seeking relief for alleged damages to federal lands and because “some of the pertinent events … occurred outside federal enclaves.” Fifth, the First Circuit found that the companies failed to establish that Rhode Island’s claims satisfied the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act’s jurisdiction requirement that cases arise “in connection with” an operation conducted on the Outer Continental Shelf. Sixth, the First Circuit found that admiralty jurisdiction did not exist because Rhode Island did not allege that a vessel caused its land-based injuries. Lastly, the First Circuit rejected the companies’ invocation of bankruptcy jurisdiction based on Rhode Island’s claims’ relationship to the bankruptcy case of Texaco Inc. or other bankruptcy matters of predecessors, subsidiaries, and affiliates. 05/19/2022 Letter Download Letter submitted by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authorities (Fourth Circuit decision in Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. BP p.l.c.). 05/06/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants-appellants regarding Ninth Circuit decision in County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp. 04/26/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island to notify court of supplemental authorities (Ninth Circuit decision in County of San Mateo case). 04/22/2022 Letter Download Letter filed in response to Rhode Island's supplemental authority (Fourth Circuit decision in Baltimore case). 04/15/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island to notify court of supplemental authorities (Fourth Circuit decision in Baltimore case). 02/22/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants in response to Rhode Island's supplemental authority (Boulder case). 02/15/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding citation of supplemental authorities (Tenth Circuit opinion in Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County case). 01/26/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants-appellants in response to plaintiff-appellee's citation of supplemental authorities (remand order in Delaware case). 01/20/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants-appellants in response to plaintiff-appellee's citation of supplemental authorities regarding Grable jurisdiction. 01/13/2022 Letter Download Letter filed by plaintiff-appellee regarding citation of supplemental authorities regarding Grable jurisdiction. 09/24/2021 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island submitting City of Hoboken v. Exxon Mobil Corp. as supplemental authority. 09/18/2021 Reply Download Supplemental reply brief filed by appellants. 09/03/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by National League of Cities et al. as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellee. 09/03/2021 Amicus Brief Download Supplemental brief of amicus curiae Natural Resources Defense Council filed in support of appellee and affirmance. 09/03/2021 Amicus Brief Download Supplemental brief filed by Massachusetts, other states, and District of Columbia as amici curiae in support of appellee and affirmance. 09/02/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by foreign relations and federal courts scholars as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellee for affirmance. 08/27/2021 Brief Download Supplemental brief filed by plaintiff-appellee. Rhode Island argued that its claims did not arise under federal common law and were not subject to removal under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. 08/04/2021 Amicus Brief Download Amicus brief filed by Indiana and 14 other states in support of appellants and reversal. 08/04/2021 Amicus Motion Download Motion filed by National Association of Manufacturers et al. to file amici curiae brief in support of appellants and reversal. 07/28/2021 Amicus Motion Download Motion filed by Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America for leave to file supplemental brief as amicus curiae in support of appellants and reversal. The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed an amicus brief in support of the defendants, arguing that federal courts had original jurisdiction over cases with claims that have an “inherently federal basis” and that the artful pleading doctrine applied to Rhode Island’s state law claims “about the inherently global problem of climate change.” 07/28/2021 Brief Download Principal supplemental brief filed by appellants. In Rhode Island’s case, the defendants submitted their principal supplemental brief on July 28, 2021 arguing that removal of the case was proper because Rhode Island’s claims necessarily arose under federal law and also because the case had a connection with the defendants’ activities on the outer continental shelf. 06/28/2021 Order Download Supplemental briefing schedule established. The First Circuit ordered the parties to file additional briefs addressing the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Baltimore case. The fossil fuel company defendants-appellants’ supplemental brief is due July 28, 2021. 06/25/2021 Motion Download Consent motion filed by appellants for leave to file supplemental briefing. 06/25/2021 Statement Download Statement of non-opposition to defendants-appellants' consent motion filed by plaintiff-appellee. 06/22/2021 Order Download Initial supplemental briefing schedule established. 05/24/2021 Letter Download Letter sent to First Circuit clerk by Supreme Court clerk. 10/29/2020 Opinion Download Remand order affirmed. First Circuit Affirmed Order Sending Rhode Island’s Climate Case Back to State Court. The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court order remanding to state court the State of Rhode Island’s lawsuit that seeks relief from oil and gas companies for climate change injuries allegedly caused by the companies’ actions. The First Circuit—like the Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits in other climate change cases—concluded that the scope of its appellate review was limited to whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. The First Circuit stated that it was “persuaded that to allow review of every alleged ground for removal rejected in the district court’s order would be to allow [the statutory exception allowing review of federal-officer removal] to swallow the general rule prohibiting review” of remand orders. The First Circuit further concluded that federal-officer removal did not apply in this case, finding that the companies’ actions in connection with three contracts with the federal government concerning oil and gas production did not have a nexus with Rhode Island’s allegations that the companies engaged in misleading marketing about the impacts of products they sold in the state. The First Circuit issued its decision several weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to review the issue of the scope of appellate review of remand orders in Baltimore’s case against energy companies. State court proceedings in Rhode Island’s case were put on hold in August pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s and Rhode Island Supreme Court’s consideration of personal jurisdiction issues in unrelated cases. 10/13/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island in response to Chevron letter of October 5, 2020. 10/05/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron. Defendant Chevron notified the First Circuit of the Supreme Court’s granting of review in BP p.l.c. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. The letter indicated that the same issue the Supreme Court agreed to review was pending before the First Circuit in the Rhode Island case and that the Supreme Court was likely to decide the Baltimore case in this term. 10/01/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants in response to Rhode Island's letter regarding the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976. 09/17/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976. 09/11/2020 Notice Download Oral argument held. The First Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in fossil fuel companies’ appeal of a federal district court’s remand of Rhode Island’s climate change case to state court. 09/04/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's August 10, 2020 letter concerning supplemental authority. 08/31/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority (denial of rehearing in County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp.). 08/27/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island in response to Chevron Corporation's August 10, 2020 letter. 08/10/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation regarding U.S.'s amicus brief in City of Oakland case. 08/10/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority (decision in United States v. California). 07/28/2020 Order Download Oral argument scheduled. First Circuit Scheduled Oral Argument on Appeal of Remand Order in Rhode Island Case. In Rhode Island’s case against fossil fuel companies, which was currently proceeding in state court, the First Circuit scheduled oral argument for September 11, 2020 in the defendants’ appeal of the remand order. 07/24/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's letter of July 13, 2020 concerning supplemental authority. 07/13/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island in response to Chevron Corporation's letter of June 29, 2020 concerning supplemental authority. 07/13/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island concerning supplemental authority (Tenth Circuit's decision in Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County v. Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc.). 07/06/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's letter of May 28, 2020 regarding the Ninth Circuit's decision in City of Oakland v. BP p.l.c. 07/06/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's letter of May 28, 2020 regarding the Ninth Circuit's decision in County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp. 06/29/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation regarding supplemental authority (Seventh Circuit's decision in Baker v. Atlantic Richfield Co.). 06/04/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's May 8, 2020 letter regarding supplemental authority. 06/01/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island in response to Chevron Corporation's May 15, 2020 letter regarding supplemental authority. 05/28/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority (City of Oakland v. BP p.l.c.). 05/28/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority (County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp.). 05/15/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation regarding supplemental authority. 05/13/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's April 29, 2020 letter regarding supplemental authority. 05/12/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's April 24, 2020 regarding supplemental authority. 05/08/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority. 04/29/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority. 04/24/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority. 04/17/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's letter of April 9, 2020 regarding supplemental authority. 04/13/2020 Not Available Download Rule 42 dismissal agreement filed as to defendant/appellant Lukoil Pan Americas, LLC. 04/09/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's letter of April 6, 2020 regarding supplemental authority. 04/09/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority. 04/06/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation to inform the court of the filing of a petition for writ of certiorari in the Baltimore case. 04/06/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island regarding supplemental authority. 04/03/2020 Response Download Response filed by Rhode Island to amicus curiae brief of Energy Policy Advocates. Rhode Island urged the court to disregard the amicus brief filed by Energy Policy Advocates, arguing that it was “filled with inflammatory, baseless speculation” that was not relevant to the substance of the appeal. 03/26/2020 Order Download Motion by Energy Policy Advocates for leave to file an untimely amicus brief in support of defendants-appellants allowed. 03/24/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by defendant-appellant Chevron Corporation in response to Rhode Island's letter of March 9, 2020 letter regarding the Fourth Circuit's decision in Baltimore's case. In response to Rhode Island's letter concerning the Fourth Circuit's decision in Baltimore's case, defendant Chevron Corporation distinguished the Fourth Circuit’s opinion, arguing that the Fourth Circuit viewed itself as bound by precedent regarding the scope of its appellate jurisdiction, which Chevron contended was not the situation in the First Circuit. Chevron also asserted that the Fourth Circuit based its determination that federal-officer removal was inapplicable on an incorrect conclusion regarding the focus of Baltimore’s claims. 03/10/2020 Amicus Motion Download Motion filed for leave to file amicus brief on behalf of Energy Policy Advocates in support of defendants-appellants. The organization Energy Policy Advocates filed a motion for leave to file an untimely amicus brief, saying it had obtained information through public records requests regarding state court bias and Rhode Island’s political and financial motivations for filing the lawsuit. 03/09/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island to inform the court of the Fourth Circuit's decision in Baltimore's case. Rhode Island contended in a letter to the First Circuit that the Fourth Circuit decision affirming the remand order in Baltimore's case “rejects the exact arguments raised … as to the proper scope of … appeal” of the remand order in its case as well as the defendants’ “tenuous justification for federal officer removal.” 03/05/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Rhode Island in response to Chevron Corporation's letter of February 27, 2020 regarding supplemental authority. 02/27/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation regarding supplemental authority concerning federal-officer removal. 02/05/2020 Response Download Letter filed by plaintiff-appellee in response to Chevron Corporation's January 29, 2020 letter regarding supplemental authority. 01/29/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation regarding supplemental authority. Chevron Corporation submitted a letter asserting that the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Juliana v. United States supported the companies’ argument that the climate change claims asserted by local and state governments against the companies “have their source in federal law and therefore belong in federal court.” 01/21/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by Chevron Corporation in response to plaintiff-appellee's January 6, 2020 letter regarding supplemental authority. 01/16/2020 Reply Download Reply brief filed by appellants. 01/07/2020 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by National League of Cities et al. as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellee and affirmance. Amicus briefs were filed in the First Circuit in support of affirmance of the remand orders. The amicus parties included “three of the nation’s leading local government associations,” which said state law tort claims “provide an important means for cities and local governments to seek abatement of and damages for localized harms arising from activities that cross jurisdictional boundaries.” The organizations argued that the district court’s decision remanding the case “stands in line with a consistent body of jurisprudence that has sustained the availability of state claims for complex cases.” Other amici in the First Circuit included 13 states that asserted “a unique interest in maintaining their state courts’ authority to develop and enforce requirements of state statutory and common law—including monetary remedies—in cases brought against commercial entities causing harm to and within their jurisdictions”; three senators, including both senators from Rhode Island, whose brief contended that courts as well as other branches of government needed to address climate change and urged scrutiny of arguments advanced by amicus party U.S. Chamber of Commerce regarding the merits and justiciability of the case due to the Chamber’s alleged efforts to “stifle” congressional and executive action on climate change; former U.S. diplomats and government officials who contended that corporate liability would not disrupt the U.S.’s international climate negotiations; the Center for Climate Integrity, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and “scholars and scientists with strong interests, education, and experience in the environment and the science of climate change,” who argued that the defendants had engaged in a “coordinated, multi-front effort” to discredit climate science that justified the local government claims; climate scientists whose brief was intended to provide the court with “an understanding of the relevant science and the unavoidable adaptation expenses” communities face; Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., which argued that neither federal common law nor the Clean Air Act completely preempted Rhode Island’s claims; and Public Citizen, Inc., which cited its concern about removal jurisdiction due to its implications for state court authority “to provide remedies under state law for actions that threaten public health and safety.” 01/06/2020 Letter Download Letter filed by plaintiff-appellee regarding supplemental authority. 01/06/2020 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by Rhode Island. 01/02/2020 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amici curiae Robert Brulle et al. in support of plaintiff-appellee and affirmance. 01/02/2020 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amici curiae Mario J. Molina et al. in support of plaintiff-appellee and affirmance. 01/02/2020 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by Natural Resources Defense Council as amicus curiae in support of appellee and affirmance. 01/02/2020 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by Massachusetts and 12 other states as amici curiae in support of appellee and affirmance. 12/31/2019 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amicus curiae Public Citizen in support of appellees and affirmance. 12/26/2019 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amici curiae Senators Sheldon Whitehouse, Jack Reed, and Edward Markey in support of appellees and affirmance. 12/26/2019 Response Download Response brief filed by Rhode Island. On December 26, 2019, the State of Rhode Island filed its brief in support of the affirmance of the federal district court order remanding to state court its action seeking relief from fossil fuel companies for climate change-related injuries. Rhode Island argued that it had the right to pursue its causes of action for public nuisance, strict liability and negligent failure to warn, strict liability and negligent design defect, trespass, impairment of public trust resources, and violations of Rhode Island’s Environmental Rights Act in state court. The State contended that the First Circuit only had jurisdiction to review whether federal-officer removal jurisdiction existed and further argued that, in any event, other grounds for removal had no merit. 12/23/2019 Amicus Brief Download Motion filed seeking leave to file corrected amicus curiae brief on behalf of former U.S. government officials in support of appellee and affirmance. 12/19/2019 Response Download Response filed by plaintiff-appellee to Chevron's December 17, 2019 notice of supplemental authority. 12/17/2019 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by defendant-appellant Chevron Corporation. 11/27/2019 Amicus Brief Download Amicus brief filed by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America in support of appellants and reversal. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed an amicus brief in the First Circuit amplifying the fossil fuel companies’ arguments that federal common law provided a basis for federal jurisdiction and that the appellate court could review the entire remand order. 11/20/2019 Brief Download Opening brief filed by appellants. Opening Brief Filed in First Circuit Seeking Reversal of Remand Order in Rhode Island's Climate Change Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies. Fossil fuel companies argued in a brief to the First Circuit Court of Appeal that they had properly removed a case brought by the State of Rhode Island in which the State seeks to hold the companies liable for the impacts of climate change. The companies’ opening brief contended that the appellate court had jurisdiction to review the entirety of the remand order, not just the district court's conclusion that the federal officer removal statute did not provide a basis for removal. The companies further argued that there were multiple grounds for removal, including that the State's claims asserted injuries were caused by nationwide (and worldwide) greenhouse gas emissions and therefore necessarily arose under federal, not state, common law. In addition, the companies argued that the presence of substantial, disputed federal questions invoked federal jurisdiction and that the case was also subject to federal jurisdiction under the federal officer removal statute, the federal bankruptcy statute, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, federal enclave doctrine, and admiralty jurisdiction, and due to complete preemption by the Clean Air Act. 10/11/2019 Notice Court issued briefing notice setting November 20, 2019 deadline for appellants' brief. 10/07/2019 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants requesting that First Circuit grant pending stay motion while Supreme Court considers stay motion in Baltimore case. 10/07/2019 Order Download Motion for stay pending appeal denied. 09/26/2019 Reply Download Reply filed by defendants in support of their expedited motion for a stay pending appeal. 09/23/2019 Response Download Response filed by plaintiff-appellee to expedited motion for stay pending appeal. 09/13/2019 Motion Download Expedited motion for a stay pending appeal filed by defendants. On September 13, 2019, the defendants filed an expedited motion for stay pending appeal in the First Circuit. Briefing on the stay motion was completed on September 26. -
Shell Oil Products Co. v. Rhode Island
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 05/24/2021 Order Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded. Supreme Court Sent Rhode Island Climate Case Back to First Circuit for Review of Other Grounds for Removal. The Supreme Court granted the fossil fuel companies' petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the First Circuit's decision affirming the district court's remand order. The Court vacated the First Circuit's judgment in the case and remanded for further consideration in light of its decision in BP p.l.c. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore holding that the Fourth Circuit should have reviewed grounds for removal other than the federal officer removal statute. Justice Alito did not take part in the consideration of the case. 12/30/2020 Petition for Writ of Certiorari Download Petition for writ of certiorari filed. In December 2020, fossil fuel companies filed a petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the First Circuit's decision affirming affirming the remand order in the climate change case brought by Rhode Island. The companies requested that the petition be held pending the outcome of the Baltimore case since their petition raises the same jurisdictional issue. -
BP p.l.c. v. Rhode Island
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 10/22/2019 Order Application for stay denied by Justice Breyer. Justice Breyer, the circuit justice for the First Circuit, denied the fossil fuel companies' application for a stay pending appeal of the remand order. In the Rhode Island case, the federal district court issued a text order granting the motion to remand two days after Justice Breyer denied the stay. The companies’ brief in their First Circuit appeal of the remand order is due on November 20. 10/07/2019 Application Download Defendants filed application to stay district court's remand order pending appeal and request for immediate administrative stay. -
Rhode Island v. Chevron Corp.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 10/24/2019 Order Download Motion to remand granted and certified copy of order sent to clerk of court for the state court. 10/09/2019 Order Download Court granted motion to stay remand order pending resolution of stay application to the Supreme Court. The district court stayed its remand order until October 24, 2019 or until Justice Breyer acts on the defendants' stay application, whichever occurs earlier. The court said it would consider whether to extend the order if Justice Breyer did not act by October 24. 10/07/2019 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants requesting that remand order not be entered until after First Circuit and Supreme Court act on pending motion and application to stay. 10/07/2019 Motion Download Motion filed by defendants to temporarily extend stay of the remand order pending resolution of stay application to the Supreme Court. 09/11/2019 Order Download Court denied motion to stay remand order pending appeal and directed that remand order not be entered until October 10, 2019 pursuant to consent order entered on August 19, 2019. Rhode Island Federal Court Denied Motion to Stay Remand Order in Rhode Island’s Climate Change Case. On September 11, 2019, the federal district court for the District of Rhode Island denied oil and gas companies’ motion for a stay of the court’s July 22 decision remanding the State of Rhode Island’s lawsuit seeking to hold the companies liable for climate change impacts. Pursuant to a consent order, the remand order will not be entered until October 10, 2019. 08/30/2019 Reply Download Reply memorandum of law filed in further support of defendants' motion to extend the stay of the remand order pending appeal. 08/23/2019 Opposition Download Opposition to defendants' motion to extend the temporary stay filed by plaintiff. 08/19/2019 Order Download Consent order entered accepting the parties' joint stipulation to extend the current temporary stay. 08/09/2019 Motion Download Motion to extend the stay of the remand order pending appeal filed by defendants. 08/09/2019 Notice of Appeal Download Notice of appeal filed by defendants. 07/22/2019 Opinion and Order Download Motion to remand granted. Federal Court Granted State of Rhode Island’s Motion to Remand Climate Change Case Against Oil and Gas Companies, but Stayed Remand Order for 60 Days. The federal district court for the District of Rhode Island remanded the State of Rhode Island’s climate change lawsuit against oil and gas companies to state court. The court found that the companies had not carried their burden of showing that the case belonged in federal court. First, the court rejected the companies’ arguments that the State artfully pleaded ¬¬its claims to avoid federal jurisdiction. The court said federal common law—which the defendants said necessarily governed the State’s claims—could not completely preempt the State’s public nuisance claim “absent congressional say-so.” The court also was not persuaded that the Clean Air Act or foreign affairs doctrine completely preempted the state-law claims. In addition, the court found that the issues of foreign affairs, federal regulations, and navigable waters raised by the companies were not disputed and substantial federal issues that the federal court could entertain “without disturbing any congressionally approved balance of federal and state judicial responsibilities.” The court said the federal issues were issues that the defendants “may press in the course of this litigation, but that are not perforce presented by the State’s claims.” The court also rejected the defendants’ arguments for removal under “bespoke jurisdictional law,” i.e., the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, federal enclave jurisdiction, the federal officer removal statute, the bankruptcy removal statute, and admiralty jurisdiction. The court stayed the remand order for 60 days to allow the parties to brief whether a stay pending appeal is warranted. 06/28/2019 Response Download Response filed by defendants to the State of Rhode Island's notice of supplemental authority. 06/17/2019 Notice Download Notice of supplemental authority filed by the State of Rhode Island. Rhode Island notified the court of the District of Maryland's order remanding Baltimore's lawsuit against oil and gas companies to state court. 03/27/2019 Letter Download Letter filed by defendants concerning appropriate procedure for staying the action to permit appeal of court's determination of remand motion and providing update on status in other pending climate change actions. 01/03/2019 Notice Download Plaintiff filed notice of errata to plaintiff's memorandum in support of its motion to remand to state court. 10/05/2018 Reply Download Reply filed by Rhode Island in support of motion to remand to state court. 09/14/2018 Declaration Download Declaration of J. Keith Couvillion filed in support of defendants' opposition to motion to remand. 09/14/2018 Declaration Download Declaration of Joshua S. Lipshutz filed in support of opposition of motion to remand. 09/14/2018 Declaration Download Declaration filed by Arnold Walton in support of defendants' opposition to plaintiffs' motion to remand to state court. 09/14/2018 Opposition Download Opposition to plaintiffs' motion to remand to state court filed by defendants. Oil and Gas Companies Argued for Rhode Island Climate Case to Stay in Federal Court. Oil and gas companies filed papers opposing Rhode Island’s motion to remand its lawsuit seeking to hold them liable for climate change impacts to Rhode Island state court. The companies argued that the case “raises federal claims that belong in federal court” and that Rhode Island “cannot avoid the comprehensive role federal law plays” through “selective pleading and strategic omission.” The companies asserted that the case “threatens to interfere with longstanding federal policies over matters of uniquely national importance, including energy policy, environmental protection, and foreign affairs.” They contested Rhode Island’s assertion that the requested remedies would redress only injuries within Rhode Island, arguing that Rhode Island sought to hold them liable for their “global conduct” and for harms that occurred all over the world and that had not relation to their conduct. The companies asserted a number of possible bases for federal jurisdiction. First, they argued that federal common law controls Rhode Island’s claims. Second, they argued that the claims arise under federal law because they necessarily raise a substantial and disputed federal issue because the nuisance claim “unavoidably second-guess the reasonableness of the balance struck by federal energy policy.” Third, they contended that the Clean Air Act and other federal statutes completely preempt Rhode Island’s claims. Fourth, they asserted that there is jurisdiction under “various jurisdiction-granting statutes and doctrines”: the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the federal officer removal statute, the federal enclaves doctrine, the bankruptcy removal statute, and federal admiralty jurisdiction. 08/17/2018 Motion Download Motion to remand filed by Rhode Island. Remand Motion Filed in Rhode Island Climate Change Case. Rhode Island also moved to remand its climate change case against fossil fuel companies to state court. First, Rhode Island said the defendants’ assertion that federal common law necessarily governed its claims was an ordinary preemption defense that did not confer federal jurisdiction. The State also contested the defendants’ contention that climate change tort claims must be exclusively pleaded under federal common law and argued that its claims fell outside the scope of federal common law. The State also disputed the contentions that its claims necessarily raised substantial, disputed federal questions and that the Clean Air Act completely preempted its claims. In addition, the court argued against jurisdiction based on the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, enclave jurisdiction, the federal officer removal statute, bankruptcy removal provisions, and admiralty jurisdiction. 07/31/2018 Order Briefing schedule set for motion to remand. On July 31, 2018, the court set a schedule for a motion to remand. Rhode Island must file its motion by August 17, and briefing will be completed on October 5. 07/19/2018 Order Case assigned to Judge Smith. Case to Be Heard by Same Judge Hearing Adaptation Case Against Shell. On July 19, 2018, the case was assigned to Chief Judge William E. Smith, who determined that the case was related to Conservation Law Foundation’s lawsuit alleging that Shell violated federal environmental laws by failing to prepare its coastal facilities in Providence for climate change impacts. 07/13/2018 Notice Download Notice of removal filed. Defendants Removed Case to Federal Court. On July 13, 2018, defendant Shell Oil Products Company, LLC (Shell) removed the action to federal court. Shell asserted multiple grounds for removal, but particularly argued that the district court had federal question jurisdiction because Rhode Island’s claims should be governed by federal common law since they “implicate uniquely federal interests” such as nationwide economic development, international relations, and national security. Shell also contended that there was federal question jurisdiction because the lawsuit “necessarily raises disputed and substantial federal questions” and because federal law completely preempts Rhode Island’s claims. In addition, Shell said the district court had original jurisdiction under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the federal officer removal statute, the federal enclave doctrine, and the bankruptcy removal statute. -
Rhode Island v. Chevron Corp.
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 08/13/2020 Decision Download Case continued for further consideration until the United States Supreme Court and the Rhode Island Supreme Court issue opinions in personal jurisdiction cases. State Court Put Rhode Island Climate Damages Case on Hold Pending U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Personal Jurisdiction Issues in Unrelated Auto Manufacturer Cases. On August 13, 2020, the state trial court in Rhode Island delayed further consideration of the defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction until the U.S. Supreme Court and the Rhode Island Supreme Court decide pending cases that concern similar personal jurisdiction issues. In this case, the defendants argue that Rhode Island has not demonstrated that its alleged injuries arise out of the defendants’ limited contacts with Rhode Island; they contend that expansion of specific jurisdiction for climate change claims would violate due process and interfere with the defendants’ home jurisdictions’ power. The cases that the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to consider in its next term concern specific jurisdiction in wrongful death and products liability cases against auto manufacturers in Minnesota and Montana; the high courts of those states found personal jurisdiction in both cases. The case in the Rhode Island Supreme Court is an appeal of a trial court finding of no specific personal jurisdiction over defendants who designed and manufactured the truck and tire involved in a wrongful death action. The Rhode Island trial court also delayed consideration of Rhode Island’s motion to compel jurisdictional discovery and stated that it would not consider the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim until it determined that the parties were properly before the court. 06/22/2020 Letter Download Supplemental letter-brief filed by State of Rhode Island. 06/22/2020 Letter Download Supplemental letter filed by the defendants. 06/09/2020 Response Download Response filed by defendants to former U.S. officials' amicus brief supporting plaintiff. 06/02/2020 Response Download Memorandum of law filed by plaintiff in response to brief of amicus curiae United States in support of defendants' motion to dismiss. 05/26/2020 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by former U.S. government officials as amici curiae supporting plaintiff and denial of defendants' motion to dismiss. 05/05/2020 Amicus Brief Download Memorandum of law filed by amicus curiae the United States in support of defendants' motion to dismiss. 04/27/2020 Reply Download Reply memorandum of law filed by defendants in support of joint motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief should be granted. 03/16/2020 Objection Download Objection filed by State of Rhode Island to defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. 03/16/2020 Opposition Download Memorandum of law filed by State of Rhode Island in opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 01/13/2020 Memorandum Download Memorandum filed by Marathon Oil Corporation and Marathon Oil Company in support of their supplemental motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. 01/13/2020 Memorandum of Law Download Memorandum of law filed in support of defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 01/13/2020 Memorandum of Law Download Memorandum of law filed in support of defendants' joint motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. 01/13/2020 Motion to Dismiss Download Supplemental motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction filed by Marathon Oil Corporation and Marathon Oil Company. 01/13/2020 Motion to Dismiss Download Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted filed by defendants. 01/13/2020 Motion to Dismiss Download Supplemental motion to dismiss filed by defendants ConocoPhillips and ConocoPhillips Company. 01/13/2020 Motion to Dismiss Download Joint motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction filed by defendants. 01/13/2020 Request Download Request for judicial notice filed in support of defendants' joint motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. 01/13/2020 Request Download Request for judicial notice filed in support of Marathon Oil Corporation's and Marathon Oil Company's supplemental motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. 07/02/2018 Complaint Download Complaint filed. Rhode Island Sued Fossil Fuel Companies for Allegedly Causing Climate Change Impacts. On July 2, 2018, the State of Rhode Island filed a lawsuit in state court asserting that 21 fossil fuel companies should be held liable for climate change impacts that the State has experienced and will experience in the future. Alleged harms include substantial sea level rise; more frequent and severe flooding, extreme precipitation events, and drought; and a warmer and more acidic ocean. Rhode Island asserted that the defendants were directly responsible for 182.9 gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions between 1965 and 2015, representing 14.81% of total carbon dioxide emissions during that time period. The complaint alleges that the defendants’ production, promotion, and marketing of fossil fuel products, along with their “simultaneous concealment of the known hazards of these products, and their championing of anti-science campaigns” actually and proximately caused Rhode Island’s injuries. The complaint asserts claims of public nuisance, strict liability for failure to warn, strict liability for design defect, negligent design defect, negligent failure to warn, trespass, impairment of public trust resources, and violations of the State Environmental Rights Act. Rhode Island seeks compensatory damages, equitable relief (including abatement of nuisances), punitive damages, disgorgement of profits, and attorneys’ fees and costs of suit.