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.

Environmental Law
Negligence
Groundwater Contamination

State of New Hampshire v. Amerada Hess Corp., et al.

Published: May 25, 2013 | Result Date: Apr. 9, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 03-C-550 Verdict –  $816,000,000

Court

Merrimack County, NH


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jessica L. Grant
(Morrison & Foerster LLP)

Benjamin A. Krass
(Hagens, Berman, Sobol & Shapiro LLP)

Richard Head
(SL Environmental Law Group)

Michael A. Delaney

Mary Maloney

Matthew F. Pawa
(Hagens, Berman, Sobol & Shapiro LLP)

Krishna K. Juvvadi

Sean M. Kiley


Defendant

William J. Stack

James W. Quinn
(Berg & Androphy)

David J. Lender

Theodore E. Tsekerides
(Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP)

Michael T. Maroney

Susan M. Campbell

Deborah Barnard


Facts

In 2003, the State of New Hampshire filed suit against Exxon Mobil Corp. in relation to its use of the additive MTBE in its gasoline. The State sought monitoring and remediation costs regarding groundwater contamination allegedly caused by releases of gasoline containing MTBE derived from services stations, junkyards and other locations throughout the state.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The State of New Hampshire alleged that ExxonMobil was negligent in disregarding the results of a 15-month internal study it commissioned that recommended that MTBE not be added to Exxon's gasoline due to its increased environmental risks, and yet the company proceeded to supply over 2.7 billion gallons of MTBE gasoline into New Hampshire. The State also contended that MTBE gasoline was a defective product and that Exxon failed to provide adequate warnings of the risks associated with MTBE gasoline.

Plaintiff contends the U.S Environmental Protection Agency has categorized MTBE as a "possible human carcinogen," and the state prohibited use of the chemical in 2007.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that it was not liable for the contamination because the risks of releasing gasoline, a known hazardous substance, are obvious, and that the spillers of the gasoline, who were not named by plaintiff in the action, were liable for most of any MTBE contamination. Further, defendant contended it used MTBE in order to comply with the federal Clean Air Act requirement to decrease air pollution, MTBE effectively reduced air pollution and MTBE levels in the groundwater in the state are low and diminishing and the State's claimed damages are speculative.

Defendant contends there is not a single recorded case of anyone getting sick from drinking water containing MTBE and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency categorized MTBE as a possible human carcinogen based on very high doses administered to animals.

The State of New Hampshire has established a safe drinking water standard for MTBE at 13ppb. The oil industry stopped using MTBE in New Hampshire in 2006 when the federal government passed the Renewable Fuels Act.

Damages

The state sought $236 million in monitoring and remediation costs.

Result

The jury awarded New Hampshire $816 million in damages, of which Exxon will pay $236 million based on its market share of 28.94 percent.

Deliberation

90 minutes

Length

three months


#101510

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

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