This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Sep. 12, 2013

David B. Goodwin

See more on David B. Goodwin

Covington & Burling LLP | San Francisco | Pratice type: Litigation


Goodwin has been representing BP PLC in insurance matters for more than 25 years - ever since he asked a partner if he could attend a meeting with the Atlantic Richfield Co., commonly known as Arco, while he was still an associate. Arco was subsequently acquired by BP. When the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig exploded in April 2010, he got the call.


BP's contract with Transocean Ltd., the operator of the drilling platform, dictated that BP was covered under the other company's $1 billion insurance policy. Some $250 million of the policy was subject to an arbitration clause, leaving $750 million in play. Transocean's insurers sued BP, claiming it only had to cover the 11 employees who died and others who were injured, not the environmental aspects of the case. The district court agreed with Transocean, but Goodwin won a reversal at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March.


"They called this a revolutionary ruling, whereas we said it was absolutely consistent with governing law and the language of the insurance policy," Goodwin said.


He noted the case is particularly important because it will determine whether Transocean's insurers get off easy by only having to cover the impacted employees, or whether they'll have to take on the much more expensive environmental - and economic - liabilities.


"BP got sued by every fisherman and resort owner and everyone else saying, 'Your oil is causing us to lose money,'" Goodwin said.


At this point, the future of the case is still up in the air. The 5th Circuit withdrew its ruling on Aug. 29 in response to the insurers' petition for rehearing and has asked the Texas Supreme Court to weigh in on how to apply its previous ruling on a similar matter.

- JOSHUA SEBOLD

#247129

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com