ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

DECEMBER 11, 2020

The companies filed their brief on November 16, arguing that the Fourth Circuit erred by concluding that it was limited to reviewing removal based on the federal-officer removal statute. In Delaware v. Delaware filed a motion to remand to state court (November 20). and County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp. have concluded.

Court 55

Court Government Litigation Litigating 55

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

OCTOBER 20, 2020

1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. The district court rejected eight grounds for removal, but the Fourth Circuit concluded its appellate jurisdiction was limited to determining whether the companies properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore , No.

Court 72

Court Government Compensatory Damages Litigation 72

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

NOVEMBER 16, 2020

The First Circuit—like the Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits in other climate change cases—concluded that the scope of its appellate review was limited to whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. Delaware v. County of Maui v. Sunoco LP , No. 2CCV-20-0000283 (Haw. Exxon Mobil Corp. ,

Cause of Action 96

Cause of Action Court Government Litigation 96

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

MAY 7, 2021

Circuit majority opinion’s interpretation was foreclosed by the statute and violated separation of powers. First, the Supreme Court concluded that the statute requiring Commission approval of affiliated-interest agreement did not require environmental review. Delaware v. Maui and Honolulu oppose the extension request.

Court 40

Court Government Construction Litigation 40