267 So. 3d 96
La. Ct. App.2018Background
- Global Marketing Solutions purchased 144 acres in the Bayou Choctaw oil field in 2005 and later discovered soil and groundwater contamination from historical oil and gas operations.
- Global never owned mineral rights; various defendants had been mineral lessees and conducted drilling on the tract historically.
- Global sent written notices (Sept. 23, 2015 and Oct. 14, 2015) to the Commissioner of Conservation under La. R.S. 30:14/30:16 requesting the Commissioner to sue; the Commissioner did not sue within ten days, but issued a compliance order to Chevron on Nov. 6, 2015.
- Global filed a fifth supplemental and amending petition seeking mandatory and prohibitory injunctions compelling remediation to Statewide Order 29-B standards and alleging ongoing violations (failure to remediate).
- Defendants (Chevron, Exxon, Key, Seal) filed exceptions of no cause of action arguing La. R.S. 30:16 does not authorize suit by a private party to remedy wholly past violations; the trial court sustained those exceptions and dismissed claims against those defendants.
- The court of appeal reversed, holding Global pleaded an actionable claim under La. R.S. 30:16 because the petition alleges ongoing (continuing) violations and the Commissioner failed to sue within ten days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Global has a cause of action under La. R.S. 30:16 after notifying the Commissioner and the Commissioner failing to sue within ten days | Global: The Commissioner failed to sue within ten days after written notice, so La. R.S. 30:16 authorizes Global to sue for injunctive relief to prevent ongoing violations and to compel remediation | Defendants: La. R.S. 30:16 authorizes suits only to prevent present or future violations, not to remedy wholly past violations; Global's claims concern past contamination and thus fail to state a cause of action | Court reversed dismissal: Global stated a cause of action under La. R.S. 30:16 because its petition alleges continuing failures to remediate (ongoing violations) and the Commissioner did not sue within ten days |
| Whether La. R.S. 30:16 applies only to continuing or threatened violations (i.e., excludes past harms) | Global: Statute supports bringing suit to prevent further violations and may include mandatory relief where violations are continuing (e.g., failure to remediate) | Defendants: Statutory text and precedent limit private suits under 30:16 to prohibitory relief against continuing or threatened violations, not relief for historical, completed wrongs | Court did not reach detailed statutory construction beyond holding the petition alleges ongoing violations; because a cause of action existed on that ground, other defenses were pretermitted |
Key Cases Cited
- Eagle Pipe & Supply, Inc. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 79 So.3d 246 (La. 2011) (held a subsequent purchaser cannot sue a third party for non-apparent pre-sale property damage absent assignment or subrogation)
- Marin v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 48 So.3d 234 (La. 2010) (addressed duties and remedies relating to oilfield contamination claims)
- Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc., 616 So.2d 1234 (La. 1993) (standard for exceptions of no cause of action; accept well-pleaded facts as true for legal sufficiency)