161 N.H. 426
N.H.2011Background
- New Hampshire opted into EPA's reformulated gasoline (RFG) program in 1995, allowing MTBE as a gasoline additive until its ban in 2007.
- State groundwater contamination by MTBE allegedly occurred, and DES set MTBE primary MCL and AGQS; public water systems have testing/notification rules.
- In 2003, NH filed MTBE groundwater damage suits; MTBE defendants removed to federal court and case was remanded to state court for trial.
- NH Supreme Court previously held in City of Dover that the State has parens patriae standing to sue for statewide MTBE contamination affecting many residents.
- MTBE defendants moved for partial summary judgment seeking to bar recovery for damages to privately owned wells, arguing such damages are private, not public, injuries.
- Question before the Court: whether the State, as parens patriae or trustee, may recover damages for MTBE contamination in privately owned wells; the court remands for trial to determine scope and standing limits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May NH recover damages for MTBE contamination in privately owned wells under parens patriae? | State argues trustee/parens patriae broad standing permits recovery for statewide public harms. | MTBE defendants contend damages to private wells are private, not public, injuries; standing limited. | Yes to some private-well damages; remand needed to limit scope. |
| Are damages for private wells capped by public trust/parens patriae requirements? | State asserts statewide injury justifies broad damages under trustee and parens patriae. | Damages must affect public rights; private-well damages may be speculative and limited. | Damages may be recoverable within limits; court must assess standing and specificity on remand. |
| Should trial court determine whether alleged private-well damages are sufficiently public in scope to sustain parens patriae standing? | State contends widespread contamination affects public health and welfare. | Damages linked to private property and private wells may be outside parens patriae. | Trial court must decide, using standard that injury to a substantial portion of population may sustain standing. |
| What factors guide assessing speculative damages for private wells under parens patriae? | State may pursue costs of testing, monitoring, remediation for private wells statewide. | Without evidence of actual risk, such costs are speculative and improper. | Trial court must evaluate specificity and likelihood of contamination; avoid blanket damages at summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Dover v. MTBE Defendants, 153 N.H. 181 (2006) (parens patriae standing for statewide MTBE contamination; statewide injury requirement)
- Alfred L. Snapp & Son, Inc. v. Puerto Rico, 458 U.S. 592 (1982) (parens patriae standing: quasi-sovereign interests and substantial segment of population)
- Missouri v. Illinois & Chicago District, 180 U.S. 208 (1901) (state standing when health and welfare of inhabitants threatened)
- Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., 206 U.S. 230 (1907) (state standing to protect health and environment beyond private rights)
- Maryland v. Louisiana, 451 U.S. 725 (1981) (state standing to protect citizens from substantial economic injury)
- Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma v. Blue Tee Corp., 653 F. Supp. 2d 1166 (2009) (parens patriae limits on damages; some claims private vs public resources)
- Satsky v. Paramount Communications, Inc. (Satsky II), 7 F.3d 1464 (1993) (consent decree limits on public-right vs private-right claims; remand for true private/public claims)
- Satsky v. Paramount Communications, Inc. (Satsky III), No. Civ.A. 90-S-1561, 1996 WL 1062376 (1996) (distinguish private vs public damages in consent-decree context)
- Alfred L. Snapp, 458 U.S. at 607, 458 U.S. 592 (1982) (parens patriae standing analysis and requirements)