Transocean, Halliburton Move For Dismissal of State Claims In Gulf Oil Spill
Presenting arguments similar to those raised last month by oil giant BP in the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill litigation, on June 3rd Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling, Inc. and related Transocean defendants, along with Halliburton Energy Services, Inc., moved for dismissal of wide-ranging state and local government claims arising from the destruction of the BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in April 2010.
The offshore oil rig Deepwater Horizon, leased to BP PLC, was drilling southeast of Venice, La., in 5,000 feet of water when it exploded April 20, 2010, after a well blowout. While most of the 126-member crew were fortunate to escape from the burning oil rig before it sank into the Gulf of Mexico, eleven rig workers died and 30 others were seriously injured. The accident also resulted in the largest marine oil spill in United States history.
Now, Transocean and Halliburton seek broad dismissal of claims brought by the states of Louisiana and Alabama, and claims contained in a local government entity master complaint, including: federal Oil Pollution Act (OPA) claims; maritime law negligence claims; state common law tort claims; punitive damages claims; state-law environmental claims; claims under Florida, Texas, and Louisiana "mini-OPA" statutes; and all deepwater drilling moratorium damage claims, among others.
At the heart of the defense dismissal motions is the notion that the Oil Pollution Act and federal and general maritime law variously bar or preempt the states' and local entities' state law and associated claims, with the result that they should be dismissed.
Transocean was the owner of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, while Halliburton was responsible for the cementing operations associated with the Macondo well.
Regarding the state and local governments' pending OPA claims, Transocean and Halliburton assert a failure by the plaintiffs to satisfy the act's presentment requirement, namely that covered claims first be presented to the designated "responsible party" prior to being asserted in a lawsuit.
BP has been designated as the responsible party under the OPA as to the release of oil from the breached Macondo wellhead. BP set up the Gulf Coast Claims Facility, itself subject to significant criticism, as a conduit for receiving and processing oil spill victim claims.
Absent demonstrated compliance with the OPA's "presentment" requirement, Transocean says, the state and local government claims have to be dismissed. Halliburton raises the same argument, and also argues it can't held responsible in any event because it is not a "responsible party" designated under the OPA.
In addition, these defendants say, the state and local entities' claims at common law are preempted or displaced by the OPA and general maritime law. Citing the general maritime law preemption of state common law claims, statutory preemption in the realm of oil pollution damages in the form of Congressional enactment of the OPA, the effects of Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act jurisdiction, and other purported defenses, Transocean and Halliburton seek to set aside state and local claims for negligence, gross negligence, nuisance, fraudulent concealment, and other tortious conduct.
The dismissal motions likely will be taken up by the court upon hearing later this summer.
The maritime injury attorneys of Arnold & Itkin LLP can advise you on all aspects of maritime law, including the Jones Act, the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, the principle of maintenance and cure and the Death on the High Seas Act.
We are skilled maritime accident trial lawyers and aggressive offshore injury attorneys for injured maritime workers. We represent maritime victims in accident, injury and wrongful death claims. Our law firm secured more than $100 million in verdicts or settlements for our clients in 2009.
For a free consultation, call us toll free at (866) 222-2606 or contact us online.
