Susman Godfrey has decades of experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in litigation concerning the discharge of hazardous substances into the environment. Our firm has represented state and local governments as well as private plaintiffs in lawsuits to stop the discharge of pollutants into the environment and to recover damages associated with those discharges. These actions have included Superfund remediation actions, natural resource damage (“NRD”) actions, and toxic tort actions for personal injuries. We have also represented insurance companies in dozens of significant coverage disputes concerning environmental contamination
Recently, state and local governments across the country, as well as private parties, have instituted climate change litigation seeking to hold polluters accountable for their impact on the environment. Susman Godfrey is on the cutting edge of this litigation and has served as lead or co-lead counsel in the most significant of these cases.
Susman Godfrey is at the forefront of this new field. Indeed, each year The National Law Journal singles out a few law firms that have done the most to make sure that people's legal rights do not depend upon their ability to pay. For its efforts regarding climate change litigation, Susman Godfrey was one of four law firms selected as a recipient of the 2008 National Law Journal - Pro Bono Awards. We worked on behalf of the Texas Cities for Clean Air Coalition in its successful efforts to block 10 new coal-burning power plants that would contribute to global climate change. Susman Godfrey represented – to the tune of $2 million in billable time – a coalition including Dallas, Houston, Fort Worth, Waco, El Paso, Plano, Arlington, Irving and 28 other local governments across Texas. In the fall of 2009, we tried a protest to the permitting of another coal-burning power plant near Corpus Christi. We are currently lead counsel in a nuisance case for greenhouse case emissions brought by the Native Village of Kivalina against numerous electric utilities and energy companies.
If you believe that you have a significant environmental case, please contact us so that we can evaluate your case, tell you more about our expertise in this area, and discuss a fee arrangement best suited to your needs.
Representative recent actions include:
Application of Las Brisas Energy Center. In November 2009, Susman Godfrey volunteered its services pro bono to represent the Texas Coalition of Clean Air Cities, a group of over 30 Texas cities, in a two-week administrative hearing where the Cities opposed the construction of the proposed Las Brisas Energy Center, a petroleum coke-fired power plant in Corpus Christi, Texas. The proposed plant would significantly contribute to climate change: Las Brisas's own projections estimated that it would emit approximately 10 million tons of carbon dioxide during each year of its operation.
Village of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil Corporation, et al. In February 2008 Susman Godfrey filed a climate change lawsuit against 5 oil companies, 14 electric utilities and the nation's largest coal producer for damages suffered by a native Alaskan coastal village that is being forced to relocate itself as a result of flooding brought on by the changing Arctic climate. The suit seeks to hold the defendants accountable for emitting millions of tons of greenhouse gases and for engaging in a conspiracy to misinform the public about the dangers of these emissions.
Garza v. Citgo. In March 2008, Susman Godfrey and its co-counsel obtained final approval of a settlement with the last remaining defendant in a major environmental class action in Corpus Christi, Texas. This complex property contamination lawsuit sought property devaluation damages for a class of more than 3000 residential properties. As lead counsel, Susman Godfrey relentlessly pursued these claims – through three separate trials and four appeals – and ultimately recovered more than $20 million for the class.
Texas Coal Plant Litigation. In 2007 Susman Godfrey successfully concluded the pro bono representation of Texas Clean Air Cities Coalition which included Dallas, Houston, Fort Worth, Waco, El Paso, Plano, Arlington, Irving, and 28 other local governments across Texas. The cities were concerned about the environmental threats resulting from the large amounts of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, mercury, and carbon dioxide to be emitted from the proposed plants. The coalition of Texas cities challenged permit applications by TXU Corporation to build eight coal-fired power units across Texas. In February 2007, following the announcement of the proposed buyout of TXU by two private equity firms and citing a new environmental direction for the company, TXU announced that it would withdraw applications for all eight of the coal units that the coalition opposed.
Earlier engagements include:
Superfund Remediation Litigation. Our firm has represented the interests of various insurance, including the London Mart, regarding a series of significant Superfund remediation coverage actions.
Union Station Associates v. Puget Sound Energy. We represented a developer in an action to recover environmental remediation costs pursuant to state and federal environmental laws. The case settled successfully following completion of discovery.
Slaven v. BP Oil. Our firm represented a class of plaintiffs in an action for damages arising from an oil spill off of Huntington Beach, California. The action settled after we won several victories in the trial court and before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
