Final Draft Reply to AP

8/9/2019 Final Draft Reply to AP

1/6

COMMERCIAL FISHERMEN AND THE LOUISIANA ENVIRONMENTAL

ACTION NETWORK HIRE PROMINENT ENVIRONMENTAL LAWYERS TO

PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS

Stuart H. Smith of the law firm Smith Stag, LLC, New Orleans, La. has assembled a

working group of lawyers from TX, LA, MS, AL and FL to prosecute claims for thosewho have been affected by BPs Deepwater Horizon oil spill. This group of lawyers hasextensive experience in their respective jurisdictions addressing the substantial losseslandowners and fishermen have suffered as a result of toxic contamination. For exampleMr. Smith was lead counsel in the Grefer v. Exxon litigation wherein a judgment of$1.043 billion was taken against Exxon for oilfield radiation contamination. Mr. Smithalong with Mr. Val Exnicios and Mr. Gladstone Jones have extensive litigationexperience against the oil and gas industry in Louisiana. Mr. Jones served as leadcounsel for Connecticut and New York lobstermen who lost their industry due topesticide contamination. The firm of Krupnick Campbell of Fort Lauderdale is renownedfor representing the shrimping industry in chemical contamination cases. The group also

contains French speaking Acadian lawyer Warren Perrin of the Perrin deLaunay firmsince many of the fishermen expected to be affected will be Acadian. Mr. GeorgeBarasich, individually and as the president of the United Commercial FishermansAssociation, and the Louisiana Environmental Action Network have requested that Mr.Smith and his team begin immediately investigating the cause of BPs DeepwaterHorizon Spill and the environmental impact associated therewith. In light of currentpredictions of large scale environmental damages, Mr. Smith and his team are preparingthe legal paperwork necessary to file suit. Any of these attorneys would be happy toprovide comment on the issues of the case. With respect to the assembled team oflawyers, Mr. Smith provided "without any hesitation I can report that these lawyers whohave joined together are ready to protect the interests of all those who have suffered and

will continue to suffer as a result of this most unfortunate disaster and like all Americans,we hope BP stops the leak soon."

1) Claims alleged in lawsuit?a. The lawsuit will bring claims under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA),

as well as various state law claims and claims under the General MaritimeLaw.

i. The lawsuit will allege gross negligence in the operation of theDeepwater Horizon rig and/or violations of applicable Federalsafety, construction, or operating regulations by BP, an agent oremployee of BP, or a person acting pursuant to a contractualrelationship with BP.

ii. The lawsuit will allege that defendants were grossly negligent inthe destruction of the Deepwater Horizon and causing of thesubsequent oil spill:

1. by allowing a blowout to occur; and2. by allowing natural gas to migrate into the annulus of the

well through the cement sheath as the cement was setting;and/or


2/6

3. by allowing the hydrostatic head to be reduced in the act ofdisplacing the riser with seawater such that it caused thewell to start flowing through the cement before it set;and/or

4. by failing to implement a sufficient well control program;

and/or5. by having a deficient blow out prevention program; and/or6. by failing to follow the blowout prevention program; and/or7. by using a faulty blow out preventer; and/or8. by failing to detect in a timely manner the unsafe pressure

drop and subsequent migration of oil and gas into theannulus; and/or

9. by failing to utilize sufficient blowout detection methodsand equipment; and/or

10. by using faulty blow out detection equipment; and/or11. by failing to ensure the proper functioning of the blow out

preventer; and/or12. by failing to implement proper safety, detection, andmonitoring procedures and protocols to discover oil and gasin the annulus or to discover the faulty blow out preventer.

b. OPA was signed into law in August 1990, largely in response to risingpublic concern following theExxon Valdezincident. OPA was intended toimprove the nation's ability to prevent and respond to oil spills byestablishing provisions that expand the federal government's ability, andprovide the money and resources necessary, to respond to oil spills.

i. OPA also attempted to cure injustices encountered under the CleanWater Act (Federal Water Pollution Control Act) and the MaritimeTort scheme of theExxon Valdezlitigation by patching holes inthese liability systems and enhancing the ability of claimants tocollect for damages by:

1. allowing parties to collect for new categories of economicdamages (specifically third-party economic loss, sincevictims who suffered damages in Alaska, but whom werenot fisherman and whom did not own property were notcompensated for their losses);

2. restricting the limits and defenses to liability that pollutershad previously used to avoid paying damages (specificallyby increasing liability limits on the amount of recovery andeliminating several defenses used by Exxon to avoidpayment);

3. improving the ability to recover damages under state laws(specifically by preempting the Limitation Liability Act of1851 for state claims which previously limited state claimsto the value of the vessel); and

4. enhancing the ability of claimants to collect for naturalresource damages (specifically by providing a stricter


3/6

method for assessing natural resource damages accountingfor both the costs of restoration and the diminution invalue, as opposed to the lesser of those two).1

c. Furthermore state law claims will also be brought based on the grosslynegligent operation of the rig which proximately caused the release of oil.

2) Damages sought?a. Under OPA, the defendants in this case will be liable for:

i. Removal Costs Any removal costs incurred by Plaintiffs for actstaken consistent with the National Contingency Plan

ii. Property Damages Damages for injury to, or economic lossesresulting from destruction of, real or personal property, which shallbe recoverable by Plaintiffs who owns or leases that property.

iii. Loss of Subsistence Use - Damages for loss of subsistence use ofnatural resources, which shall be recoverable by Plaintiffs who souses natural resources which have been injured, destroyed, or lost,

without regard to the ownership or management of the resources.iv. Lost Profits - Damages equal to the loss of profits or impairment ofearning capacity due to the injury, destruction, or loss of realproperty, personal property, or natural resources, which shall berecoverable by Plaintiffs

b. Plaintiffs also intend to seek compensatory and punitive damages undervarious state law claims and the General Maritime Law.

i. Supreme Court jurisprudence has approved punitive damages up toten times (10x) the amount of compensatory damages.

c. Scope of Damages:i. Removal costs and property damages will be exorbitant due to the

large area of contamination along the coast.ii. Furthermore the oil spill will potentially have grave economic

impact on coastal states, far in excess of that experienced byAlaska from the Exxon Valdez spill due to (i) the larger area ofcontamination and (ii) the more robust seafood and recreationindustries in the Gulf Coast.

1. This oil spill has the potential to basically shut down themajority of the Gulf Coast seafood, recreation and tourismindustry in which case the Defendants will be liable for thelost profits and damages to reputation of the commercialfishermen, processors, marinasetc.

3) Who is being represented?a. George Barasich, both individually and on behalf of the United

Commercial Fishermans Association.b. The Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Mary Lee Orr.

1 See Liability Incentives for Reducing the Costs of Oil Spills by Bobbie Lively-Diehold of the U.S.E.P.A. and Paul Ameer, Gary Yoshioka, and Justin Anand of ICF Inc. presented at theInternational OilSpill Conference (http://www.iosc.org/papers/01139.pdf)


4/6

c. Furthermore the group expects to be retained by numerous other clients asthe situation develops and more information is discovered regarding theoil spill and its impacts.

4) Who is responsible?

a. BP and other companies invested in the project, as holders of the offshorelease and lessees of the Deepwater Horizonb. Halliburton as the company that performed the grossly negligent

cementing jobc. Transocean as the owner/operator of the Deepwater Horizond. Cameron [formerly Cameron Cooper], as the manufacturer of the faulty

blow out preventer; ande. any other companies that in the future are discovered to have contributed

to the proximate causation of the spill.

5) Context:

a. The Exxon Valdez spilled approximately 10.9M gallons (roughly 260,000bbls) of oil into Prince William Sound. The oil slick in total spread over11,000 square miles and onto over 1,300 miles of shoreline in PrinceWilliam Sound.

b. For the Deepwater Horizon spill, the Coast Guard has estimated a spillrate of 1,000 bbls/day. However it was initially estimated to be 8,000bbls/day on April 22, 2010, and the rate of expansion of the oil slicksuggests that the real value is closer to the latter. Based on aerial imageryshowing the size of the slick, some have estimated that a minimum of6,200 bbls is already in the water ranging up to as high as 126,000 bbls(roughly half the size of the Exxon Valdez spill). The blowout occurred onApril 20, 2010, and in just seven days, the slick has grown to over 2,200square miles (already 1/5th the area of the Exxon-Valdez spill). While theValdez spill caused estimated economic losses to the Alaskan fisheriesindustry of $3-50M in 1990 and more throughout the 1990s, Louisianasfisheries alone is estimated to be a $2.4B/year industry. When consideringthat other states will also possibly be affected by the Deepwater Horizonspill, the economic losses due to the damage to fisheries could dwarf thatof the Exxon-Valdez spill. There are still a lot of unknowns regarding thepotential impacts of the leak. However the leak will likely continue foranother 2 months and easily as much as 4 months, while BP drills reliefwells. Based on the rapid expansion of the slick, the size Gulf Coastfisheries industry and the length of time the leak is expected to occur, thisspill easily has the potential to greatly surpass the Exxon-Valdez spill bothin size and economic impact.

6) Information on the group:a. Smith Stag, LLC

i. Website: www.smithstag.comii. Address: 365 Canal Street, Suite 2850, New Orleans, LA 70130
http://www.smithstag.com/http://www.smithstag.com/


5/6

iii. Phone: (504)-593-9600iv. Persons Involved:

1. Stuart H. Smith Cell: (786) 879-96012. Michael G. Stag

b. Jones, Swanson, Huddell & Garrison, LLC

i. Website: www.jonesswanson.comii. Address: Pan-American Life Center601 Poydras Street, Suite 2655New Orleans, Louisiana 70130

iii. Phone: (504) 523-2500iv. Persons Involved:

1. Gladstone Jones Cell: (504) 616-63332. Kevin Huddell3. Ebhard Garrison

c. Krupnick Campbell Malone Buser Slama Hancock Liberman and McKeei. Website: www.krupnicklaw.com

ii. Address:700 S.E. Third Avenue, Suite 100, Fort Lauderdale, FL33316-1186


1. Robert McKeed. Liska, Exnicios & Nungesser

i. Address: 365 Canal Street, Suite 2290, New Orleans, LA 70130ii. Phone: (504) 410-9611

iii. Persons Involved:1. Val Exnicios Cell: (504) 495-9666

e. Murphy Falcon Kuykendall Ravenell and Murphy (Murphy PA)i. Website: www.murphypa.com

ii. Address: One South Street, Baltimore, MD, 21202iii. Phone: 205-960-7279iv. Persons Involved:

1. Frederick T. Kuykendall IIIf. Sacks & Weston

i. Website: www.sackslaw.comii. Address: 114 Old York Rd., Jenkintown, PA 19046


1. Andrew Sacks2. Julie Parker3. John Weston

g. Morris, Sakalarios & Blackwell, PLLCi. Website: www.morris-sakalarios.com

ii. Address: Post Office Drawer 1858 (39403-1858), 1817 HardyStreet (39401) Hattiesburg, Mississippi

http://www.jonesswanson.com/http://www.krupnicklaw.com/http://www.murphypa.com/http://www.sackslaw.com/http://www.morris-sakalarios.com/http://www.jonesswanson.com/http://www.krupnicklaw.com/http://www.murphypa.com/http://www.sackslaw.com/http://www.morris-sakalarios.com/


6/6

1. Stacey L. Simsh. The Bilek Law Firm, LLP

i. Website: www.bileklaw.comii. Address: 808 Travis, Ste 802, Houston, TX, 77002

iii. Phone: (713) 227-7720

iv. Persons Involved:1. Thomas E. Bilek2. Kelly Cox Bilek

i. Perrin Landry deLaunay Dartez & Ouelleti. Address: 251 La Rue France, P.O. Box 53597, Lafayette, LA

70508ii. Phone: (337) 237-8500

iii. Persons Involved:1. Warren A. Perrin

7) Client Information:

a. George Barasichi. Position: President of the United Commercial FishermansAssociation

ii. Phone: (504) 460-1468b. Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN), Mary Lee Orr

i. Contact Person: Mary Lee Orrii. Phone: (225) 588-5059

iii. Website: www.leanweb.org

8) Possible contacts for cause of explosion:a. http://blogs.chron.com/newswatchenergy/archives/2010/04/transocean_rig

.html
http://www.bileklaw.com/http://www.leanweb.org/http://blogs.chron.com/newswatchenergy/archives/2010/04/transocean_rig.htmlhttp://blogs.chron.com/newswatchenergy/archives/2010/04/transocean_rig.htmlhttp://www.bileklaw.com/http://www.leanweb.org/http://blogs.chron.com/newswatchenergy/archives/2010/04/transocean_rig.htmlhttp://blogs.chron.com/newswatchenergy/archives/2010/04/transocean_rig.html

Final Draft Reply to AP

Documents

Transcript of Final Draft Reply to AP