December 1, 2021

Volume XI, Number 335

Advertisement
Advertisement

November 30, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

November 29, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Texas Jury Declines to Award Damages in $10B Toxic Flaring Case

In the first test case in a series of actions involving about 48,000 plaintiffs, a Texas jury declined to award damages in an action against Defendant BP Products North America’s Texas City Refinery, despite finding that the refinery had negligently flared approximately 500,000 pounds of noxious chemicals. See In re: MDL Litig. regarding Texas City Refinery Ultracracker Emission, No. 10-UC-0001 (56th Jud. Dist. Tex. Oct. 10, 2013)

Plaintiffs brought property damage and personal injury claims, alleging that BP surreptitiously vented 19 different toxic chemicals during an extended emission period from April to May 2010. Although BP later disclosed to state and federal regulators that it flared the chemicals, Plaintiffs claimed that BP understated the significance of the event. Plaintiffs sought $200,000 each plus $10 billion in punitive damages to be donated to charity for property damage. The jury found that BP had flared chemicals, but declined to award damages.

The jury’s verdict comes a little more than a week after BP defeated class certification in a federal lawsuit over air pollution related to the same refinery. See Cannon v. BP Products N. Am. Inc., No. 10-00622 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2013), available at www.bdlaw.com/assets/attachmnets/cannonvBP.pdf. In that case, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled that the damages model prepared by the plaintiffs’ expert did not adequately tie air pollution from BP’s refinery to alleged diminution to the plaintiffs’ home values. Id.at 15-34. Since plaintiffs presented no alternative to prove causation or damages, the court could “not envision how a class action trial would operate.” Id. at 37.  

© 2021 Beveridge & Diamond PC National Law Review, Volume III, Number 302
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Mackenzie S. Schoonmaker Environmental Litigation Attorney Beveridge & Diamond New York, NY
Principal

Mackenzie’s practice includes both litigation and regulatory matters arising under FIFRA, the Clean Water Act, and related environmental laws.

She is passionate about conserving air, water, wildlife, and land for future generations, and enjoys helping clients navigate and enforce the detailed framework of environmental law because she believes compliance is key to preventing adverse impacts to the environment.

Mackenzie is a co-chair of Beveridge & Diamond’s Industrial Hemp & Cannabis industry team. She advises clients, and regularly writes and presents, on federal...

212-702-5415
Daniel M. Krainin Environmental Litigation Attorney Beveridge & Diamond New York, NY
Principal

Dan deploys more than two decades of environmental litigation experience to resolve clients’ legal and business challenges.

Primarily focused on environmental and toxic tort litigation, Dan helps clients successfully resolve groundwater contamination, hazardous waste site remediation, natural resource damages, permit defense and product-related matters. He enjoys using his skills as a litigator to help clients solve environmental problems.

Among his many wins, Dan successfully led a team that defeated an emergency challenge to a permit that Dan’s client needed to continue its...

212-702 5417
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement