Shell, BP and Sunoco to Pay $196M Over Gasoline Additives in NJ
The payouts mean that New Jersey has now secured settlements of more than $350 million from various defendant companies named in multidistrict litigation over MTBE—methyl tertiary butyl ether—contamination that is playing out in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Three major petroleum conglomerates—Shell, BP and Sunoco—have agreed to pay New Jersey a total of $196.5 million to settle claims that they damaged the state’s environment and natural resources by producing gasoline laced with the additive MTBE.
According to an announcement on Monday by New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal, the payouts by the oil and chemical companies mean that New Jersey has now secured settlements of more than $350 million from various defendant companies named in multidistrict litigation over MTBE—methyl tertiary butyl ether—contamination.
“These are important legal settlements on behalf of New Jersey citizens—not only in terms of the dollars, but in terms of sending a message that we are committed to working with DEP [the state Department of Environmental Protection] to protect our state’s natural resources and hold accountable companies that pollute,” Grewal said in a statement.
The state has been pursuing the litigation for more than a decade, claiming that waterways throughout New Jersey have been contaminated by gasoline containing MTBE that was supplied to the market by the Bayway Refinery in Linden, New Jersey.
The DEP first filed suit in state court in 2007 against ConocoPhillips Co., which was then the owner of the Bayway Refinery, and nearly 50 other companies, under state environmental laws.
The case was later consolidated by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, where a related case against Chevron was dismissed in 2014.
U.S. District Judge Vernon Broderick of the Southern District of New York is presiding over the litigation. The defendants include major petroleum refiners, distributors and sellers of gasoline in New Jersey, as well as independent chemical manufacturers of MTBE, according to Grewal’s office.
The state continues to pursue its MTBE damage claims against the remaining named defendants in the litigation who haven’t settled, the office noted.
The state pointed out Monday that those defendants include ExxonMobil.
Representatives for Shell, BP and Sunoco could not be immediately reached for comment on Monday.
According to Grewal, Sunoco—including Sunoco Inc. and Sunoco Inc. (R&M)—has already paid the state $64 million to resolve its liability for MTBE damages. Meanwhile, BP—including BP America Inc., BP Amoco Chemical Co., BP Corporation North America Inc., BP Products North America Inc. and Atlantic Richfield Co.—has agreed in a separate settlement to pay $64 million, and has already paid the state $32 million. And Shell—including Equilon Enterprises, Motiva Enterprises, Shell Oil Co., Shell Oil Products Co. and Shell Trading (US) Co.—has agreed to pay $68.5 million.
The state was represented by, among other attorneys, outside counsel Leonard Kaufmann, a partner at Cohn Lifland Pearlman Herrmann & Knopf in Saddle Brook, New Jersey. He declined to comment Monday.
This premium content is locked for New Jersey Law Journal subscribers only.
Subscribe now to enjoy unlimited access to New Jersey Law Journal content,
5 free articles* across the ALM Network every 30 days,
Exclusive access to other free ALM publications
And exclusive discounts on ALM events and publications.
*May exclude premium content Already have an account? Sign In Now
Interested in customizing your subscription with Law.com All Access?
Contact our Sales Professionals at 1-855-808-4530 or send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org to learn more.
Jason Grant is a New York-based litigation reporter for the New York Law Journal and Law.com, and a former practicing attorney in Manhattan. Contact Jason at email@example.com. On Twitter: @JasonBarrGrant
"If you approach a client at the start of a new assignment and say I ve planned out where I think we need to be at different stages as this progresses, can I run it past you, what are they going to say? No. I don t care or Sure I d find that helpful."
A New Jersey appeals court has rejected a constitutional challenge to provisions of the Criminal Justice Reform Act that authorized a $42 million hike in court filing fees.
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
2 Oliver St #608
Gary Martin Hays & Associates
235 Peachtree St NE #400
Smith & Hassler
225 N Loop W #525
Presented by BigVoodoo
More from ALM
With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
Our Team Account subscription service are for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both option are priced the same.
Dynamically explore and compare data on law firms, companies, individual lawyers, and industry trends.
Exclusive Depth and Reach.
Legal Compass includes access to our exclusive industry reports, combining the unmatched expertise of our analyst team with ALM’s deep bench of proprietary information to provide insights that can’t be found anywhere else.
Big Pictures and Fine Details
Legal Compass delivers you the full scope of information, from the rankings of the Am Law 200 and NLJ 500 to intricate details and comparisons of firms’ financials, staffing, clients, news and events.
When drafting arbitration clauses, specificity matters. The last thing you want is a disagreement over the provision itself. That would defeat the purpose of the arbitration, and result in litigating the meaning of the clause.
As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters.
Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss.
Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.