Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Exxon Mobile Corporation
Date: 12-18-2002
Case Number: B153817
Judge: Vogel
Court: California Court of Appeals, Second Appellate District, Division Four
Plaintiff's Attorney: Environmental Law Foundation, James R. Wheaton, Iryna Kwasny and
Megan Evart; Yeroushalmi & Associates and Reuben Yeroushalmi for Plaintiff
and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Richard M. Frank, Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Theodora Berger, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Craig C. Thompson
and Edward G. Weil, Supervising Deputy Attorneys General, Dennis A. Ragen and Susan S. Fiering, Deputy Attorneys General, for People of the State of California
as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant.
Richard Toshiyuki Drury and William B. Rostov for Communities for a
Better Environment as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant.
Defendant's Attorney: Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Jeffrey J. Parker and Lori A.
Osmundsen for Defendant and Respondent Exxon Mobil Corporation.
McKenna Long & Aldridge, Stanley W. Landfair and Michael J. Stiles;
Steinhart & Falconer, Jeffrey M. Hamerling and Matthew S. Covington for
Atlantic Richfield Company, Mobil Corporation, Unocal Corporation, and
Chevron U.S.A., Inc., as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Respondent.
Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. It is now codified in Health and Safety Code
sections 25249.5-25249.13.1 Section 25249.5 provides, in pertinent part: "No
person in the course of doing business shall knowingly discharge or release a
chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into water or
onto or into land where such chemical passes or probably will pass into any source
of drinking water . . . ." The initiative provides both for fines and injunctive relief.
Subdivision (b) of section 25249.7 provides that anyone who has violated section
25249.5 "shall be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed $2500 per day for each such violation in addition to any other penalty established by law." Subdivision (a)
of section 25249.7 provides that "[a]ny person violating or threatening to violate
Section 25249.5 . . . may be enjoined in any court of competent jurisdiction."
This appeal comes to us in the form of a stipulated judgment in which the
parties agreed to the pertinent facts in order to expedite appellate review of an
important question of law. (See, e.g., Nogart v. Upjohn Co. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 383,
399-402.) The appeal raises only one question of law, an issue of statutory
interpretation. Does the "passive migration" or "continued presence" of a
prohibited chemical in the soil constitute a "discharge or release" within the
meaning of section 25249.5? We conclude the answer is "no."
* * *
Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.
About This Case
What was the outcome of Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Exxon Mobile Corporation?
The outcome was: The judgment is affirmed.
Which court heard Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Exxon Mobile Corporation?
This case was heard in California Court of Appeals, Second Appellate District, Division Four, CA. The presiding judge was Vogel.
Who were the attorneys in Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Exxon Mobile Corporation?
Plaintiff's attorney: Environmental Law Foundation, James R. Wheaton, Iryna Kwasny and Megan Evart; Yeroushalmi & Associates and Reuben Yeroushalmi for Plaintiff and Appellant. Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Richard M. Frank, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Theodora Berger, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Craig C. Thompson and Edward G. Weil, Supervising Deputy Attorneys General, Dennis A. Ragen and Susan S. Fiering, Deputy Attorneys General, for People of the State of California as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant.Richard Toshiyuki Drury and William B. Rostov for Communities for a Better Environment as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant.. Defendant's attorney: Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Jeffrey J. Parker and Lori A. Osmundsen for Defendant and Respondent Exxon Mobil Corporation.McKenna Long & Aldridge, Stanley W. Landfair and Michael J. Stiles; Steinhart & Falconer, Jeffrey M. Hamerling and Matthew S. Covington for Atlantic Richfield Company, Mobil Corporation, Unocal Corporation, and Chevron U.S.A., Inc., as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Respondent..
When was Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Exxon Mobile Corporation decided?
This case was decided on December 18, 2002.