Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

In the cases brought by Shoalwater Bay and Makah Indian Tribes seeking to hold fossil fuel companies liable for harms cause by climate change, a Washington Superior Court granted Exxon Mobil Corporation and ExxonMobil Oil Corporation’s request for disqualification of the judge. The disqualification occurred one month after the judge denied a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and a motion to stay proceedings while the U.S. Supreme Court considers Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County. Washington law provides that any party to a lawsuit may disqualify a judge, subject to several limitations, including that no party may disqualify more than one judge in any matter and the notice of disqualification must be filed before the judge makes any discretionary ruling in the case. In the order granting the request for disqualification, the court noted that all parties seemed to agree that the judge had not made any discretionary rulings. The court concluded that although Chevron defendants previously exercised their statutory right to disqualification in the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe’s case prior to the administrative consolidation of the cases for pre-trial proceedings, no defendant had yet exercised their collective right to disqualify a judge in the Makah Indian Tribe’s case. The court therefore granted the request for disqualification in the Makah Indian Tribe’s case. Because of the consolidation for pre-trial proceedings, the order also operated, “at a minimum,” to disqualify the judge in the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe’s case during such proceedings.

The Washington Superior Court denied fossil fuel companies’ emergency motion to stay proceedings pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s resolution of Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County. The Superior Court found that a potential stay of more than a year would “greatly prejudice” the Tribes due to the risk of evidentiary loss. The court also found that the defendants did not attempt to show a clear case of hardship or inequity that would outweigh the Tribes’ showing of prejudice. The Superior Court also cited “a significant probability” that the Supreme Court would not reach the issue of whether state law climate deception claims were preempted by federal law.

A Washington Superior Court denied fossil fuel companies’ motions to dismiss state law deceptive marketing-based climate claims asserted by Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe and Makah Indian Tribe. The court adopted the Tribes’ proposed order concluding that federal law did not preempt or preclude the claims; that the claims did not pose non-justiciable political questions; that the claims were timely; and that the Tribes adequately stated claims for public nuisance and for violations of the Washington Products Liability Act.

After the U.S. Supreme Court granted fossil fuel companies' petition for writ of certiorari in Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County to review the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling that federal law did not preempt Boulder's claims, the fossil fuel industry defendants in this case requested that the Washington Superior Court stay a scheduled a hearing on the defendants' motions to dismiss. The court proceeded with the hearing on the defendants’ motions to dismiss the cases on February 27.

On December 20, 2023, two Tribes—the Makah Indian Tribe and the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe—filed separate lawsuits in Washington Superior Court alleging that fossil fuel companies misled consumers and the public about the dangers of climate change. The complaints alleged that this “successful climate deception campaign” inflated and sustained the market for fossil fuels, leading to increased greenhouse gas emissions and “devastating” climate change impacts to the Tribes and their reservations. The Tribes asserted claims under Washington’s public nuisance statute and the Washington Product Liability Act. The Tribes requested that the court order the companies to abate the nuisance, including through the establishment of abatement funds for the Tribes to use to remediate and adapt their reservation lands, natural resources, and infrastructure. The Tribes also requested compensatory damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs.