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

Stewart v. Entergy Corp.

Filing Date: 2021
Case Categories:
  • Adaptation
    • Actions seeking money damages for losses
Principal Laws:
Contract Law, State Law—Negligence, State Law–Strict Liability
Description: Lawsuit seeking to hold an electricity provider liable for damages allegedly sustained as a result of the failure of electrical infrastructure during Hurricane Ida.
  • Stewart v. Entergy Corp.
    Docket number(s): 22-30177
    Court/Admin Entity: 5th Cir.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    05/27/2022 Opinion Download Remand order affirmed. Fifth Circuit Affirmed Remand Order in Class Action Against Entergy for Power Outages After Hurricane Ida. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an order remanding to Louisiana state court a class action lawsuit brought by individuals who alleged that Entergy Corporation and related entities (Entergy) negligently designed, operated, and maintained the electricity transmission system, which led to power outages in the wake of Hurricane Ida. The plaintiffs’ allegations included that Entergy was aware of climate change and aware that Louisiana was experiencing more hurricanes and other severe weather. The plaintiffs also alleged that Entergy failed to take actions in response to deficiencies identified in a 2007 “Hardening Study.” In its opinion affirming the remand order, the Fifth Circuit held that the Class Action Fairness Act’s (CAFA’s) local controversy and home state exceptions barred federal jurisdiction. The court also held that it lacked jurisdiction to review other asserted grounds for federal jurisdiction. (The Fifth Circuit concluded that the Supreme Court’s decision in BP p.l.c. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore extending appellate review to the entire remand order when one ground for removal is the federal officer removal statute or the civil rights removal statute did not expressly or implicitly overrule Fifth Circuit precedent barring appellate review of non-CAFA-related grounds for removal.)
  • Stewart v. Entergy Corp.
    Docket number(s): 2:21-cv-01834
    Court/Admin Entity: E.D. La.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    03/07/2022 Order Download Motion to remand to state court granted.
  • Stewart v. Entergy Corp.
    Docket number(s): 2021-07365
    Court/Admin Entity: La. Dist. Ct.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    09/18/2021 Complaint Download Complaint filed. Class Action Filed Against Electricity Provider for Damages Sustained in Louisiana During and After Hurricane Ida. Property owners, lessees, and occupants of four parishes in Louisiana filed a class action in Louisiana Civil District Court seeking damages from Entergy Corporation and related defendants for damages sustained as a result of the “foreseeable failure” of Entergy’s distribution and transmission equipment and systems during Hurricane Ida. The plaintiffs alleged that the failure had occurred “despite evidence which demonstrated the weakness and perilous condition of their equipment and systems which was well known to Entergy.” The plaintiffs also alleged that Entergy “has become aware that the climate of the world (including southeast Louisiana) is changing” and that Louisiana was experiencing more hurricanes, other severe tropical storms, and periods of heat and flooding. They contended that studies, including a 2007 “Hardening Study,” had put Entergy on notice of the deficiencies in its systems but that Entergy had failed to take action in response and had cut funding for operations and maintenance expenses. The plaintiffs asserted claims of negligence and strict liability, as well as breaches of express and implied contracts.

© 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.