Homeowners class can sue pipeline over Santa Barbara spill

A federal judge refused to throw out the majority of the claims filed by a subclass of beachfront property owners against a Texas oil company responsible for a 2015 oil spill.

The incident occurred May 19, 2015 northwest of Santa Barbara. The oil flooded onto hundreds of properties, coastal bluffs, beaches and into the Pacific Ocean, plaintiffs say. It resulted in closures of public beach access and destroyed marine life and natural resources, their complaint says.

Tuesday's ruling by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez of the Central District of California means several claims against Plains alleged by both oiled and unoiled property owners will remain in the class. Keith Andrews et al v. Plains All American Pipeline LP, 2:15-CV-04113 (C.D. Cal., filed April 17, 2018).

Gutierrez did dismiss claims for trespass for unoiled properties and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage for both oiled and unoiled properties after plaintiffs conceded they couldn't make a showing. Trespass claims remain for plaintiffs with oiled properties.

The company could not be reached for comment Thursday.

Named plaintiff Keith Andrews and his fellow beachfront property owners located along a 130-mile stretch from Santa Barbara County to Los Angeles County were certified as a subclass in 2018. The subclass comprises owners of residential properties adjacent to the mean high tide line off the coast and who have some private beach on their properties. It also includes property owners whose land doesn't abut the mean high tide but directly faces the beach and didn't experience oiling.

Those with unoiled properties can still claim they lost regular use and enjoyment of their properties as well as public beach access.

In its motion for summary judgment, Plains argued unoiled property owners' only theory of injury and damages involves their restricted access to the public beach.

Gutierrez disagreed, pointing out in his ruling that even unoiled properties experienced damage resulting from the oil along the shore.

Negligence claims will also remain in the action, Gutierrez ruled. Previous courts have concluded negligence isn't barred by the economic loss rule when plaintiffs assert damage to a property rather than sole economic harm, the judge wrote.

Claims for continuing private nuisance could be left up to the jury to decide from the plaintiffs' evidence focusing on the level and duration of oil contamination along the beach that interfered with private property, Gutierrez ruled.

All those issues are to be tried starting Sept. 1, according to plaintiffs' counsel A. Barry Cappello, managing partner at Santa Barbara-based Cappello Noel LLP. The firm is handling the case along with Lieff Cabraser Heimann Bernstein LLP.

Henry Weissman, a partner at Munger Tolles and Olson LLP who represents Plains, could not be reached for comment Friday.

Plains was convicted of a felony, knowingly engaging in or causing the discharge of about 140,000 gallons of crude oil onto Refugio State Beach, and eight misdemeanors, following a four-month trial in 2018. People v. Plains All American Pipeline LP, 1495091 (Santa Barbara. Super. Ct. filed May 16, 2016).