Supreme Court will hear Exxon's appeal of 2.5 Billion Punitive Damage award  *

Supreme Court decision, June, 2008  *
 

 Exxon Valdez ruling worries environmental watchdogs

Oil companies say they'll still focus on safety

By ROBERT McCLURE
P-I REPORTER

"Will the U.S. Supreme Court decision to slash the punitive damages award in the Exxon Valdez case embolden oil companies to take shortcuts that put the environment at risk?"

.....

"Then came the Supreme Court's decision last week, slashing Exxon's punitive damages from $2.5 billion to $500 million -- after punitive damages already had been cut by an appeals court from the jury's $5 billion award.

However, the Supreme Court did not deal with a key legal issue that could have a huge impact on oil companies' future liability, said John Paul Jones, a University of Richmond law professor involved in the case.

Here's what happened: Justice Samuel Alito holds Exxon stock, so he removed himself from consideration of the case. In a part of the case that wasn't well publicized, Jones said, the other eight justices deadlocked 4-4 on whether shipping companies can be held responsible for their crews' mistakes on the water. "

.....

P-I reporter Robert McClure can be reached at 206-448-8092 or robertmcclure@seattlepi.com

Read his blog on the environment at datelineearth.com

seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/369710_exxon05.html

fair use - Permission granted to repost - abbrev version ... go to link for full article

I don't understand why there was any change in the 2.5 billion - if the Justices were 4 - 4
 
Why didn't the 2.5 billion 'stand?
As to what Exxon paid for cleanup, that is the biggest travesty of all.  They harmed the environment much more and caused a great deal of health damage to Workers and those the Workers came around.  There was no such thing as 'bioremediation'  Exxon was Spray 'n Washing the beaches with a known poison, teratogen, neurotoxin, pesticide:  2-butoxyethanol was in the clean up product/s.  (Same chemical is in home cleaning products, their lawyers argued in the few cases that have gone to court)

The story Exxon never wants to address is "What happened to the Workers?"  I think this is the chemical to suspect for autoimmune issues, cancers, CFIDS, CFS, FM and the cause of 'gulf war syndrome' a couple of years later.  Maybe there never would have been a 'gulf war syndrome' affecting 28% of the 700,000 force ... had Exxon blown the whistle on themselves.

They were looking for blood in urine, and when found repetitively, they should have said, "Stop"  This chemical in cleanup, 2-butoxyethanol, is harming the workers. 

It is this BUTYL which should be most suspect for the rapid acceleration of global warming in recent years!

They could have been championed for the cause of so much health damage in the civilian population, and soldiers of every war era ... had they wanted to.

As it is, they 'cut these workers loose' and didn't seem to care that they would have no idea what was wrong with them ... nor would their families nor their doctors.

http://www.valdezlink.com/

Compare EVOS Robin to Gulf War Vet Donny

Death of Fishermen 

Elders Lost

Learn About Workers - More  And

    "Frankly, in all the litigation, and through all the controversy after the spill, nobody has ever asked the question: 

What about human health?" 

said Dr. John Middaugh, Alaska state epidemiologist  *

Will there be a study? *

Why Did Exxon use a Bad Product?    *    Inipol EAP 22

Public Comment - 2003 - How to clean up a spill?
 

Posted by Labspoint at 7/5/08

margaret,

Exxon got Souter to turn. The decision was 5-3. If the court would have held to its norm it would have been a 4-4 decision with the lower court ruling upheld. Souter is the only one who knows why he did what he did. Might want to check his Swiss account if you can.

Who was responsible for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill? *

Where is the Exxon Valdez ship today?  *