In an article for Law360, Scott M. Press, a member of Goldberg Segalla’s Environmental Law group, examines the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s unanimous decision that affirmed the dismissal of the city of New York’s climate change lawsuit.
In the article, Scott discusses how the federal appellate court in City of New York v. BP PLC et al. resolved the issue on whether municipalities could seek to hold multinational companies liable for damages caused by global greenhouse emissions under state common law. He added that the Second Circuit’s decision puts more pressure on the U.S. Supreme Court to address federal preemption as it relates to climate change tort litigation when it resolves the appeal of BP PLC et al. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore later in 2021.
“Later this year, in BP v. Baltimore, all eyes will be on the Supreme Court, as it addresses whether Baltimore’s lawsuit was properly removed to federal court,” Scott writes. “The specific issue before the high court is whether a federal appeals court has the authority to review any issue encompassed in a district court’s remand order. While the issue may be addressed narrowly, parties on both sides of the aisle in the climate change litigation context hope that the Supreme Court will address the federal removal issue referenced by the Second Circuit—and whether a federal question exists based upon the defendants’ arguments, upheld by the Second Circuit, that federal common law and the Clean Air Act displace state law claims seeking damages for climate change.”
“What NYC Climate Case Dismissal Means for Baltimore Suit,” Law360, April 30, 2021
Scott M. Press focuses his practice on complex litigation involving environmental law and land use, representing clients in environmental litigation claims, regulatory and compliance counseling, and enforcement. Scott provides clients with an in-depth knowledge of state and federal environmental regulations including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Clean Water Act, and others. He routinely handles complex environmental litigation matters, as well as regulatory enforcement and compliance matters including hazardous waste, site remediation and federal and state cost recovery and contribution claims. He also litigates matters involving contamination and exposure to chemicals and substances such as lead, PFAs, 1,4-Dioxane, TCE, and mold, and advises clients in environmental due diligence related to the purchase and sale of commercial property.