BUSINESS GROUPS CALL FOUL ON MICHIGAN AG’S ANTICIPATED LAWSUIT By MANDI RISKO
BUSINESS GROUPS CALL FOUL ON MICHIGAN AG’S ANTICIPATED LAWSUIT
JUNE 7, 2024 | MANDI RISKO
5 0 Google +0 0
The Michigan’s Attorney General’s office continues to face strong pushback from local leaders in response to its announcement last month that it is seeking outside counsel to help the state file a climate lawsuit against oil and gas producers. Most recently, a group of the state’s largest business organizations called the intended lawsuit a “dangerous and inappropriate use of a state office” that “would have a negative and chilling effect on the state’s entire economy.”
Published yesterday, the public statement expressing “disappointment” and opposing the expected lawsuit was signed by the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Michigan Manufacturers Association, the Michigan Retailers Association, the Michigan Oil & Gas Association, the Detroit Regional Chamber, the Grand Rapids Chamber, the Michigan Chemistry Council and the Michigan Petroleum Association/Michigan Association of Convenience Stores.
The organizations point out that such a lawsuit threatens to chill business activity in the Wolverine state by raising energy prices, thereby harming businesses across numerous sectors:
“This dangerous and inappropriate use of a state office to attack and demonize Michigan businesses would have a negative and chilling effect on the state’s entire economy. Every business and household in this state relies upon access to affordable and reliable energy. Our healthcare system, building and construction sector, and manufacturing supply chains all succeed or fail based on this fundamental truth.” (emphasis added)
Underscoring the litigation’s lack of merit, the signers point out that the courts have historically not sided with the plaintiffs and instead have wondered if these cases “in any way serv[e] the public interest”:
“Courts from across the country have questioned the logic and standing of lawsuits that attempt to specify and discriminate against certain businesses or business sectors surrounding global climate change. Indeed, the overarching question from many of these courts seems to be whether such ill-posited attempts to seek damages against private companies based on little or no legal backing in any way serves the public interest.” (emphasis added)
The business groups also called out the typical fee structure for plaintiffs firms supporting these lawsuits, a contingency fee basis – an agreement that the firm won’t be paid directly for their work during litigation but, if successful, will be rewarded with a percentage of the total damages:
“It is additionally problematic the Attorney General is attempting to pursue this litigation by the way of a request for proposal to private trial attorneys, who stand to benefit in the form of massive financial awards through this contingency-fee structure. This is money that will provide no benefit taxpayers but only enrich a select few who curry the favor of the Attorney General herself.” (emphasis added)
Deadline To Submit Proposals Has Passed – Does It Matter?
The deadline for law firms to submit a proposal was on June 5, and while applicants are unknown at this time, the usual suspects are almost certainly gunning for the position – if they haven’t won it behind closed doors already.
Both Sher Edling – which already represents dozens of plaintiffs in lawsuits against energy companies, and DiCello Levitt– which recently joined the campaign as the law firm representing the City of Chicago and Bucks County in their respective suits – have previous ties to the Michigan Attorney General’s Office.
In 2019, when the Michigan Attorney General released an RFP for outside counsel to work on PFAS litigation, both Sher Edling and DiCello Levitt applied to lead the case. Although DiCello Levitt ultimately secured the job to sue PFAS producers and subsequently filed a lawsuit in January 2020, public records obtained by Energy Policy Advocates show that the Michigan AG had met with Sher Edling to discuss climate litigation as early October 2019, raising questions as to how long climate litigation has been in the works and whether the AG has already determined its outside counsel.
Bottom line: Looking ahead, Attorney General Nessel intends to hire outside counsel by August 2, and Crains Detroit Business reports that she hopes to file the lawsuit within the year. But only time will tell whether the state will embark on yet another misguided effort to sue those that provide us with the energy we need to heat our homes and fuel our vehicles.
One thing is clear, however: while the Rockefeller-backed climate campaign continues to lobby its way through local governments and state capitals in the Midwest, businesses and constituents in the region are squarely opposed to these inordinate efforts that are bound to “raise the price” of energy for working families across the country.