Mar
Let the AGW lawsuits begin
This AFP article, discusses the class action lawsuit that charges Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is responsible for damages and deaths by Hurricane Katrina.
The class action suit brought by residents from southern Mississippi, which was ravaged by hurricane-force winds and driving rains, was first filed just weeks after the August 2005 storm hit. ”The plaintiffs allege that defendants’ operation of energy, fossil fuels, and chemical industries in the United States caused the emission of greenhouse gasses that contributed to global warming,” say the documents seen by AFP.
The attorneys have the audacity to claim:
The increase in global surface air and water temperatures “in turn caused a rise in sea levels and added to the ferocity of Hurricane Katrina, which combined to destroy the plaintiffs’ private property, as well as public property useful to them.”
Evidently you don’t need any real scientific proof to file a a lawsuit, you just cite Al Gore’s BS, cast aspersions about global warming and let the judicial system have at it. ”Damn the torpedos! Full steam ahead!”
This one lawsuit is going to cost many millions to litigate something that isn’t even scientifically proven. It’s costing all of the following companies money and you can bet you’ll see the effect upon the price of what they sell.
The suit, claiming compensation and punitive damages from multinational companies including Shell, ExxonMobile, BP and Chevron, has already passed several key legal hurdles, after initially being knocked back by the lowest court.
It gets worse. This isn’t the only lawsuit being filed about global warming. AGW has the insurance companies nervous about whether they’re liable for alleged global warming damges caused by their clients.
The Insurance Journal has an article titled Global Warming Litigation Just Getting Started; Costs Will Be Significant.
The article cites several court rulings that opened the door for lawsuits over global warming to proceed.
This is one example from the article:
The Alaskan Village of Kivalina sued ExxonMobil and numerous other oil and gas companies alleging that the defendants caused harm to their village by contributing to global warming. The district court dismissed the suit for lack of standing and for raising a non-justiciable political question. The case is now on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.
The potential liability for insurance companies has prompted one insurer to sue over whether they are liable to defend suits about global warming:
Steadfast Insurance Company filed a declaratory judgment action asking a Virginia state court to rule that the commercial general liability (CGL) policy it issued to AES did not provide coverage of the global warming claims asserted against AES in the Village of Kivalina lawsuit and that it was not required to defend AES against that lawsuit.
In its declaratory judgment action, Steadfast asserts that its CGL policy does not cover global warming claims for three reasons: (1) the damages allegedly caused by global warming were not caused by an “occurrence” within the meaning of the CGL policy, (2) since the damages allegedly caused by global warming began prior to the date the policy was issued, the “loss in progress” endorsement excluded coverage and (3) coverage is excluded under the policy’s pollution exclusion.
We aren’t only facing getting screwed by cap-and-trade schemes, we now need to worry about how much more the cost of these lawsuits will be taken out of the consumers’ (our) pockets.
Indeed, to the extent proof of the existence of global warming and the causation of damages by global warming are issues, the pre-trial proceedings in such cases are likely to take years and require expensive expert testimony. Thus, coverage issues will be front and center as insurers are presented with claims arising out of or related to global warming.
Seems AGW is good for the lawyers, too. This prompts me to wonder if any of these companies will soon see fit to start suing all the people responsible for this post-normal science? That is something I’d pay good money to see.
Possibly related posts:
This is what it is all about, the law is going to tear the global warming fallacy to shreds, especially the CO2 element of the argument.
Same with Gorebull, all the talk in the world matters little about this scoundrel and treasonist, it is the class action suits for damages that is going to bring down this fraudster.
Oh the joys of no win no fee (except for the defendents) litigation…
This is a class action lawsuit that plaintiffs’ attorneys will eventually regret bringing! There is no sufficient scientific proof of AGW, and plaintiffs have the burden of proof in any lawsuit. Consensus of opinion is not relevant evidence.
Defendants obviously cannot agree to any settlement because doing so would open the flood gates to similar suits.
Well, I hope none of the residents of the Alaskan village of Kivalina are using any gasoline, oil, oil products such as plastic, natural gas, asphalt roads, or electricity. If so, they would be suing themselves, in effect, since they would be part of the cause of global warming. Break out the spears and bow-and-arrows…
It will be back to “Blubber…It’s what’s for dinner.”
Nope, It would be the same as with cigarettes. It’s not the end users fault because they were not adequately warned, or so the story goes. The precedent has been set.
I’m not a big fan if big oil, but I suppose the oil companies could say “All right. We’ll pay up for any warming effects on your village. But first, we’ll collect your cars, snowmobiles, light bulbs, TV sets, plastic chairs, asphalt roads, gas heaters, etc, to help reduce the heat problem, and reduce the use of oil products. We can begin collecting your stuff on Monday. See you Monday morning. Start building your igloos and dog sleds now.”
Good one, John.
Exactly. It’s back to blubber for them. And we could call this village farce BLUBBERGATE. Or perhaps BLUBBER-GATE for readability…
LOL “Blubbergate” Why didn’t I think of that one?
BLUBBERGATE:
“In the old days we had igloos, dog sleds, illness, short lifespans, plenty snow and plenty blubber. Now look: Blubber harder to find, and you can’t get Happy Meal at McDonald’s for under $5!! Our lives ruined by oil companies!!”
I’m sick of lawyers & their law suits! I wonder why really big oil isn’t mentioned in the suit! What you don’t want to make Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran, etc… pay for evil CO2???? This is stupid yet costly.
PPeabody Coal was one of 16 filing suits by the endangerment filing deadline. Now Lisa Jackson can swear under oath the evidence for CO2 warming. SHe has no science.
Unfortunately, jury trial lawsuits can be won by skilled plaintiff attorneys and carefully selected malleable jurors regardless of the strength of evidence against the case. Never assume that the evidence against AGW will save the day. In the US tort system, somebody is always at fault and has to pay damages.
This is so rediculous…..It’s time someone sues Al Gore!