Profile image
By Climate Change Dispatch (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

Federal Judge Stumps Trial Lawyers Handling NYC’s Climate Lawsuit With One Question

Thursday, June 14, 2018 5:52
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

A federal judge posed a question to lawyers representing New York City in its global warming lawsuit against five major oil companies — does the city invest in fossil fuels?

The answer is an unambiguous yes, but attorneys representing the city told U.S. District Court Judge John Keenan they “don’t know,” further arguing that fact was “beyond the scope of the pleadings” during a court hearing on Tuesday.

Keenan didn’t seem to buy it and pressed attorney Matthew Pawa on whether or not New York City was trying to relitigate failed attempts to get a monetary judgment on damages allegedly caused by man-made warming.

New York City filed its lawsuit against oil companies in January, demanding compensation for damages allegedly caused by global warming, including future damages. The city hired the firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP to handle its suit in exchange for a share of any winnings — potentially billions of dollars.

Keenan heard arguments on Tuesday on whether or not New York City’s lawsuit should be dismissed. Pawa argued carbon dioxide emissions from oil companies products constituted a “nuisance,” but Keenan didn’t seem to buy it.

“I don’t think it’s hard to take judicial notice of the fact the city police department has a lot of cars, that the firehouse has trucks,” Keenan said. “Isn’t the plaintiff using the product that is the subject of this lawsuit?”

Pawa admitted the city used fossil fuels, but said the question wasn’t pertinent to defendants’ — BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell — motion to dismiss the case.

After huddling with co-counsel, Pawa also said: “We don’t know the answer to that your honor” when asked about the city’s fossil fuel investments.

Pawa’s answer was odd given New York City announced earlier this year it would divest from fossil fuel assets within five years. The announcement was made the same time Mayor Bill De Blasio announced their lawsuit against oil companies — the very case Pawa was arguing in court.

“In total, the City’s five pension funds hold roughly $5 billion in the securities of over 190 fossil fuel companies,” reads the city’s January news release on divestment. “The City’s move is among the most significant divestment efforts in the world to date.”

Pawa did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment on why he told Judge Keenan he did not know if the city was invested in fossil fuel companies.

Hagens Berman is handling lawsuits for at least three other local governments — San Francisco, Oakland and King County, Wa. All these suits are against the same five oil companies. The firm handles these cases on a contingency fee basis, meaning they get a percentage of any winnings.

The firm Seeger Weiss LLP is also handling New York City’s lawsuit, and the firm Sher Edling LLP is handling lawsuits for six California cities and counties against fossil fuel companies. These firms are also working for a percentage of any winnings.

The suits allege global warming violate state nuisance and trespassing laws, which have sometimes been applied to pollution. Trial lawyers also accused energy companies of trying to downplay the harms their products allegedly cause.

In March, U.S. District Judge William Alsup said plaintiff’s attempts to show oil companies conspired to cover up global warming science “shows nothing of the sort,” according to a journalist present at the hearing.

Read more at Daily Caller


We encourage you to Share our Reports, Analyses, Breaking News and Videos. Simply Click your Favorite Social Media Button and Share.

Report abuse


Your Comments
Question Razz Sad Evil Exclaim Smile Redface Biggrin Surprised Eek Confused Cool LOL Mad Twisted Rolleyes Wink Idea Arrow Neutral Cry Mr. Green

Total 8 comments
  • MediaMike

    Has anyone but me figured out that the climate really started changing in the 90s when geo-engineering aerosols started occluding the Sun on a daily basis?

    • Anonymous

      No. Nobody but you has figured that out. That’s why you’re so special.

    • Anonymous

      Actually, and I’ll probably be hauled-off by Nephilim to a closed Walmart for revealing this, climate change began, because of excessive bovine flatulence. Incidentally, it was once global warming, but it became climate change, when it was shown things are, in fact, getting colder. Al Gore said, “What the hell?! That’s not good for the box office or my green stocks!” But I digress. What happened is the Rothschilds instructed their deep state ranchers to feed their cattle green burritos, surreptitiously, in the middle of the night, which they’ve been doing, for decades now. What looks like a problem, for people spraying their pits with geo-engineered, Jew aerosols, is actually the work of Zionist cows. I haven’t had time to do the bone chilling and must see, monetized YouTube video proof, from the media center in my mother’s basement, but I’m working on that!


        I disagree. Climate change began when we developed our first climate. It was once extremely hot, then it cooled, then it was nice, then we called it an ice age, then a warming period, then it was nice. In the 70s they warned of Global Winter, then Global Warming, then Climate Change. I believe you have underestimated the influence of duck farts and the bright thing in the sky on climate change.

        • Andy

          duck farts!!! i knew i was missing something in my calculations – now just how many ducks are there on earth and how many litres of flatulent gas do they produce annually,,,,,

          wait,,,, bright thing in the sky????? OHhhhhh you mean the SUN? whoda thunkit!

          back to the drawing board!!

  • FauxScienceSlayer

    NO free moving, three atom gas molecule can capture, store, redirect or amplify radiant energy photons moving at the speed of light.

    There is NO CO2 warming and NO legitimate science debate, as Lukewarmist skeptics are controlled opposition charlatans.

    “Mommie, Can We Play Obombie Truth Origami” at FauxScienceSlayer website…. climaclownology is modern alchemy….

  • Andy

    wouldn’t the plaintiff have to actually prove global warming exists in order to make such a case? in a court of law they’ll have to present actual facts, not scientific fraud, altered data and computer models which get absolutely nothing right

    have fun with that

  • baba riley

    The Ameri-Asians did it. Those fires they used to warm themselves as they walked across the Bering Strait (called something by them) started the whole warming trend. We can also blame the Autralian Aborigines too. They took fire with them.

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Top Global

Top Alternative



Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.