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.

Torts
RICO
Deprivation of Civil Rights

Committee to Protect Our Agricultural Water; Mike Hopkins; John Wedel v. Occidental Oil and Gas Corporation; Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA); California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA); Chevron USA Inc.; California Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources (DOGGR); Edmund G. Brown; Timothy R. Kustic; Mark Nechodom; Lorelei H.

Published: Feb. 25, 2017 | Result Date: Jan. 20, 2017 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1:15-cv-01323-DAD-JLT Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Court

USDC Eastern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

R. Rex Parris
(Parris Law)

Patricia K. Oliver
(Parris Law Firm)

George C. Martinez

Alexander R. Wheeler
(Parris Law Firm)


Defendant

Theresa A.H. Goldner

Matthew T. Kline
(O'Melveny & Myers LLP)

Christopher R. Rodriguez
(Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith LLP)

Keli N. Osaki
(Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP)

Dimitri D. Portnoi
(O'Melveny & Myers LLP)

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.
(Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP)

Joel M. Athey
(Holmes, Taylor, Athey, Cowan & Jones LLP)

Jeffrey Dintzer
(Alston & Bird LLP)

William E. Thomson Jr.
(Brooks Kushman PC)

Kenneth G. Lake
(California Dept. of Justice)

Kristina Azlin
(Holland & Knight LLP)


Facts

The Committee to Protect our Agricultural Water and farmers, Mike Hopkins and John Wedel, filed suit against various oil and gas companies and government entities and officials, in connection with the fresh water supply.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that defendants formed an enterprise to illegally increase oil production and maximize profits and tax revenue by permitting oil companies to inject produced water. This allegedly violated various laws, including the federal Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
In their motions to dismiss, defendants contended, among other things, that plaintiffs' claims were barred by the First Amendment, absolute immunity and qualified immunity, and plaintiffs failed to state a cognizable RICO claim, civil rights claim, and lacked standing.

Result

The court granted defendants' motions, with leave to amend as to some claims and without leave to amend as to others.

Other Information

On Feb. 10, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed their case rather than amending.


#103702

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

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