35 F.4th 405
5th Cir.2022Background:
- The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) creates strict liability for oil spills and allows claimants who clean up spills to seek reimbursement from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund administered by the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC); if the Fund pays, the United States is subrogated to the claimant’s rights and may sue to recoup removal costs.
- ERR, LLC operated a wastewater-treatment facility in Louisiana from which oil entered the Mississippi River in May 2015; state and Coast Guard investigations attributed the spill to ERR.
- Oil Mop, a contractor, performed cleanup and billed ERR; after ERR refused to pay, Oil Mop sought and received reimbursement from the NPFC for removal costs.
- The NPFC (United States) sued ERR to recoup the Fund’s payments plus administrative costs, fees, and interest; the Government characterized its relief as equitable restitution.
- ERR demanded a jury trial; the district court denied the demand, held a four-day bench trial, and entered judgment for the Government. ERR appealed solely on Seventh Amendment grounds.
- The Fifth Circuit held that the Seventh Amendment guarantees a jury trial for the Government’s OPA recoupment and subrogation claims, reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded for a jury trial.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Government’s OPA recoupment claim entitles ERR to a jury under the Seventh Amendment | The Government: claim is equitable (restitution) so no jury right | ERR: claim is legal (quasi-contract/unjust enrichment at law), so jury right applies | Held: recoupment claim is legal in nature (analogous to quasi-contract/restitution at law); jury required |
| Whether the Government’s subrogation claim entitles ERR to a jury | The Government: subrogation is equitable and derives from courts of equity, so no jury right | ERR: subrogation merely substitutes plaintiff; underlying claim and remedy are legal, so jury right applies; overlapping issues require jury | Held: subrogation is intertwined with the legal recoupment claim (and in any event legal in nature); jury required on overlapping issues and on the claim itself |
Key Cases Cited
- Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc., 523 U.S. 340 (statutory actions analogous to common-law triggers Seventh Amendment)
- Tull v. United States, 481 U.S. 412 (two-factor Seventh Amendment test: historical analogy and nature of remedy)
- Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33 (remedy analysis controls; jury right for legal claims)
- Great–West Life & Annuity Ins. Co. v. Knudson, 534 U.S. 204 (distinguishes restitution at law vs. in equity)
- Ross v. Bernhard, 396 U.S. 531 (equitable threshold doctrines do not forfeit jury rights on underlying legal issues)
- Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. Westover, 359 U.S. 500 (legal claims joined with equitable claims preserve jury rights on legal issues)
- Dairy Queen, Inc. v. Wood, 369 U.S. 469 (same principle on jury rights when legal and equitable claims overlap)
- Liu v. SEC, 140 S. Ct. 1936 (accounting for profits/disgorgement and distinctions between legal and equitable restitution)