U. S. Supreme Court to decide Exxon Valdez's punitive damages, and Federal False Claims Act.
The US Supreme Court has granted certiorari in order to resolve the dispute over the $2.5 billion punitive damages to be paid by Exxon Mobil, and its shipping subsidiary, for the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill of 11 million gallons of crude oil in Prince William Sound, Alaska.
The questions for the Court to decide are:
1. May punitive damages be imposed under maritime law against a shipowner (as the Ninth Circuit held, contrary to decisions of the First, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits) for the conduct of a ship's master at sea, absent a finding that the owner directed, countenanced, or participated in that conduct, and even when the conduct was contrary to policies established and enforced by the owner?
2. When Congress has specified the criminal and civil penalties for maritime conduct in a controlling statute, here the Clean Water Act, but has not provided for punitive damages, may judge-made federal maritime law (as the Ninth Circuit held, contrary to decisions of the First, Second, Fifth, and Sixth Circuits) expand the penalties Congress provided by adding a punitive damages remedy?
3. Is this $2.5 billion punitive damages award, which is larger than the total of all punitive damages awards affirmed by all federal appellate courts in our history, within the limits allowed by (1) federal maritime law or (2) if maritime law
could permit such an award, constitutional due process?
Also, the Court has agreed to hear the case of Allison Engine v. United States, (07-214), in order to decide whether the Federal False Claims Act [31 USC 3729 text] is limited to claims of misspent funds submitted to a federal government agency, or whether it also applies to claims submitted to a federal contractor that will ultimately be paid with federal money.
Stay tuned.
The questions for the Court to decide are:
1. May punitive damages be imposed under maritime law against a shipowner (as the Ninth Circuit held, contrary to decisions of the First, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits) for the conduct of a ship's master at sea, absent a finding that the owner directed, countenanced, or participated in that conduct, and even when the conduct was contrary to policies established and enforced by the owner?
2. When Congress has specified the criminal and civil penalties for maritime conduct in a controlling statute, here the Clean Water Act, but has not provided for punitive damages, may judge-made federal maritime law (as the Ninth Circuit held, contrary to decisions of the First, Second, Fifth, and Sixth Circuits) expand the penalties Congress provided by adding a punitive damages remedy?
3. Is this $2.5 billion punitive damages award, which is larger than the total of all punitive damages awards affirmed by all federal appellate courts in our history, within the limits allowed by (1) federal maritime law or (2) if maritime law
could permit such an award, constitutional due process?
Also, the Court has agreed to hear the case of Allison Engine v. United States, (07-214), in order to decide whether the Federal False Claims Act [31 USC 3729 text] is limited to claims of misspent funds submitted to a federal government agency, or whether it also applies to claims submitted to a federal contractor that will ultimately be paid with federal money.
Stay tuned.
Labels: Justice, U. S. Supreme Court
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 5:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home