![]() The cities also have filed a motion to amend their complaints to withdraw federal common law public nuisance claims that they added after the district court denied remand.īriefing was completed on the fossil fuel companies’ petition for writ of certiorari, and briefs were distributed for the justices’ Jconference.īrief filed by respondents in opposition to petition for a writ of certiorari. ![]() The petition had requested that the Court consider the questions of “hether putative state-law tort claims alleging harm from global climate change are removable because they arise under federal law” and “hether a plaintiff is barred from challenging removal on appeal after curing any jurisdictional defect and litigating the case to final judgment.” The cities’ renewed motion for remand is currently pending in the district court, with the cities arguing against the companies’ remaining grounds for removal: federal-officer removal, Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, enclave jurisdiction, and bankruptcy removal. Supreme Court denied fossil fuel companies’ petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Ninth Circuit’s decision reversing the district court’s 2018 denial of Oakland’s and San Francisco’s motions to remand their climate change nuisance cases to California state court. ![]() Supreme Court Declined to Review Ninth Circuit Reversal of Denial of Remand in Oakland and San Francisco Climate Cases. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |