Comer v. Murphy Oil

The property=owners who had their property destroyed by Hurricane Katrina brought a suit against two dozen fossil fuel companies for their contribution to climate change which contributed to the destructive power of Hurricane Katrina.

The case followed a highly unusual procedural path, but was ultimately dismissed.

Background
Ned Comer and co-plaintiffs were landowners on the Mississippi coastline whose property was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. They sued two dozen fossil fuel companies for compensatory and punitive damages, alleging that the defendants' greenhouse gas emissions had contributed to sea level rise and the strengthening of Hurricane Katrina, thereby resulting in the destruction of their property. The plaintiffs alleged public and private nuisance, fraud, and civil conspiracy.

The district court dismissed the case for lack of standing. Plaintiffs appealed to the Fifth Circuit which reversed, finding that the plaintiffs could show standing for private and public nuisance, though not for civil conspiracy.

What occurred after was highly irregular. The defendants petitioned the Firth Circuit Court of Appeals for an en banc rehearing, a rehearing of the case by the entire slate of Circuit Court judges. Seven of the Fifth Circuit Court judges quickly recused themselves, leaving only nine judges to rule on the petition for rehearing, the bare minimum required to make quorum. In a 6-3 vote, the Circuit Court judges agreed to rehear the case. Following Fifth Circuit Court local rules, the acceptance of rehearing automatically vacated the Fifth Circuit's initial decision which granted the plaintiffs standing.

A short time later, one of the remaining judges also decided to recuse herself, offering no reason. This brought the number of judges below the quorum required to rehear the case. The judges concluded that they had no choice but to dismiss the appeal, leaving the decision by the trial court, which dismissed the case, as the final ruling.

Ruling
In an unusual procedural move, a Circuit Court ruling that was favorable for the plaintiffs was vacated, leaving the dismissal by the trial court as the final outcome of the case.

Links

 * Sabin Center Database