LITTLE ROCK, AR — ExxonMobil has filed a motion to dismiss lawsuits from the United States and the State of Arkansas.
The original complaint, filed by State and Federal officials in June, alleges six causes of action against the oil giant and seeks civil penalties under the federal Clean Water Act.
According to a response filed by Attorney General Dustin McDaniel on Monday, Exxon says the claims should be dismissed because the State doesn’t “state a claim upon which relief can be granted,” and that sufficient factual evidence has not been presented to support each allegation detailed in the lawsuit.
Exxon’s motion for dismissal claims the State hasn’t sufficiently presented facts demonstrating that the waste from the spill and cleanup is “hazardous,” or that the release of crude oil into a creek, wetlands and a lake doesn’t adequately describe water or air “pollution,” according to McDaniel’s response.
The response cites precedents ruling that complaints attacked by this particular motion to dismiss don’t need detailed factual allegations, and the fundamental facts, in this case, are simple enough that great detail is not necessary.
Regarding another allegation in the lawsuit, Exxon says the State’s complaint doesn’t provide factual support that the “storage, transport or disposal of the recovered oil” violated Arkansas law.
McDaniel argues that the complaint clearly describes the storage of contaminated waste at “an unpermitted location,” which is prohibited by the Arkansas Hazardous Waste Management Act, and that Exxon doesn’t deny not having a storage permit.
The response also cites a letter sent to Exxon from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality stating the company was “operating an illegal hazardous waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal Facility,” and that the company continued to store waste at the site after being ordered to stop.
Exxon’s motion for dismissal claims the State’s complaint doesn’t adequately provide factual support for allegations that crude released from the Pegasus Pipeline caused water or air pollution, to which McDaniel responds by citing State regulations and laws.
Finally, Exxon’s motion says the State draws a conclusion that “air pollution caused by the release of petroleum has unreasonably interfered with Mayflower residents’ enjoyment of life,” and that this claim cannot be factually supported.
McDaniel refers to a precedent stating that “most often, facts are susceptible to objective verification,” to support his claim that the enjoyment of one’s life being affected by an oil spill as a fact, not a conclusion.
He writes, “It is a statement that could be answered simply by asking an affected landowner.”
The case is set to go to trial June 16.
The original complaint, filed by State and Federal officials in June, alleges six causes of action against the oil giant and seeks civil penalties under the federal Clean Water Act.
According to a response filed by Attorney General Dustin McDaniel on Monday, Exxon says the claims should be dismissed because the State doesn’t “state a claim upon which relief can be granted,” and that sufficient factual evidence has not been presented to support each allegation detailed in the lawsuit.
Exxon’s motion for dismissal claims the State hasn’t sufficiently presented facts demonstrating that the waste from the spill and cleanup is “hazardous,” or that the release of crude oil into a creek, wetlands and a lake doesn’t adequately describe water or air “pollution,” according to McDaniel’s response.
The response cites precedents ruling that complaints attacked by this particular motion to dismiss don’t need detailed factual allegations, and the fundamental facts, in this case, are simple enough that great detail is not necessary.
Regarding another allegation in the lawsuit, Exxon says the State’s complaint doesn’t provide factual support that the “storage, transport or disposal of the recovered oil” violated Arkansas law.
McDaniel argues that the complaint clearly describes the storage of contaminated waste at “an unpermitted location,” which is prohibited by the Arkansas Hazardous Waste Management Act, and that Exxon doesn’t deny not having a storage permit.
The response also cites a letter sent to Exxon from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality stating the company was “operating an illegal hazardous waste Treatment, Storage, Disposal Facility,” and that the company continued to store waste at the site after being ordered to stop.
Exxon’s motion for dismissal claims the State’s complaint doesn’t adequately provide factual support for allegations that crude released from the Pegasus Pipeline caused water or air pollution, to which McDaniel responds by citing State regulations and laws.
Finally, Exxon’s motion says the State draws a conclusion that “air pollution caused by the release of petroleum has unreasonably interfered with Mayflower residents’ enjoyment of life,” and that this claim cannot be factually supported.
McDaniel refers to a precedent stating that “most often, facts are susceptible to objective verification,” to support his claim that the enjoyment of one’s life being affected by an oil spill as a fact, not a conclusion.
He writes, “It is a statement that could be answered simply by asking an affected landowner.”
The case is set to go to trial June 16.