- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Connecticut
- /
- State v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
Litigation
State v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
About this case
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
07/23/2024
Decision
Motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction denied.
A Connecticut trial court determined that it had personal jurisdiction over Exxon Mobil Corporation (Exxon) and denied Exxon’s motion to dismiss the State of Connecticut’s lawsuit under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. The State alleges that Exxon engaged in a “systematic campaign of deception” regarding its products’ impacts on climate. First, the court concluded that under Connecticut Appellate Court precedent Exxon consented to jurisdiction by registering to do business in Connecticut as a foreign corporation. The court further concluded that a due process analysis was unnecessary under Supreme Court and other federal precedents. Second, the court concluded that long arm jurisdiction applied to Exxon and that exercising such jurisdiction comported with due process. The court noted that its determinations regarding long arm jurisdiction were subject to the State’s “ultimate burden” to establish jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.
09/14/2020
Complaint
Complaint filed.
Connecticut filed a lawsuit against Exxon Mobil Corporation in Connecticut Superior Court alleging that Exxon “misled and deceived Connecticut consumers about the negative effects of its business practices on the climate.” Connecticut alleged that Exxon executives and other agents knew as early as the 1950s that fossil fuel combustion contributed to global warming and that when Exxon had the opportunity in the 1980s “to responsibly contribute to public understanding of climate change and its potentially catastrophic consequences,” Exxon instead “began a systematic campaign of deception” to undermine climate science and maximize its profits. The complaint listed “myriad negative consequences in Connecticut” to which the State alleged the “campaign of deception” contributed, including sea level rise, flooding, drought, increases in extreme temperatures and severe storms, decreases in air quality, contamination of drinking water, increases in spread of diseases, and severe economic consequences. The State asserted eight counts under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and sought injunctive and equitable relief; civil penalties; restitution for State expenditures attributable to Exxon to respond to the effects of climate change; disgorgement of revenues, profits, and gains; disclosure of research and studies on climate change; and funding of a corrective education campaign.
Summary
Lawsuit seeking to hold Exxon Mobil Corporation liable for violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act in connection with alleged deceptive acts to create uncertainty about climate science.