Victims Of BP Oil Spill Come From All Walks Of Life

The 2010 BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico has affected millions of people. From employment to environmental issues, the problems reach far and wide. That has led to legal issues which continue to turn into courtroom battles. Fighting those battles consumes an abundance of time and also calls for professional assistance when going down certain legal avenues.

The grand scale of this oil spill was massive. BP was responsible for dumping over 5 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. That is over 200 million gallons of oil. It left the Gulf region with a disaster that will have staggering effects for years to come.

The Mississippi coast was also devastated by this disaster. In the midst of recovery, many people and businesses sought out legal action as there were plenty of reasons that prompted such an option. At the top of the list of legal issues has been a loss of business and profits. There have been countless lawsuits filed by businesses and individual workers because of lost wages. This group of plaintiffs includes owners and employees in areas of commercial fishing, hotels, resort communities and more. Shore towns have been negatively impacted to the point where a number of people’s livelihood were practically snatched away.

Health issues have also prompted many lawsuits. There are significant health risks as a result of the chemical and oil dispersants in the Gulf region. Potentially toxic chemicals were utilized in an attempt to disperse the oil spill and they too have caused adverse health effects.

It goes without saying that the environmental damage caused by the BP oil spill has been catastrophic. Damages to wildlife, wetlands and the entire ecosystem have been vast and widespread. This has led to the emergence of criminal and civil lawsuits filed against BP.

Damage due to the massive oil spill has effected residential, commercial and even undeveloped properties. Damage to property has even resulted from the dispersants used to clean up the spilled oil. Billions of dollars in property claims have already been filed.

Cleanup efforts have also brought about a new wave of injuries. Health problems have effected a high number of people who have been working to clean up the oil spill. The burning of the spilled oil has been responsible for a number of health issues in workers. Wrongful death lawsuits have been filed due to the negligence that caused the Deepwater Horizon explosion. Survivors of that explosion have also filed lawsuits due to the various injuries they sustained.

The lawsuits really know no bounds as BP shareholders have also gotten into the act. The company has been accused of misleading investors and shareholders which has caused BP’s value to take a significant dip. Additionally, BP is being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission in an attempt to discover whether or not insider trading infractions were committed in the days and weeks following the oil spill.

One extreme mishap four years ago is still affecting an entire region today. Efforts have been made by BP in an attempt to clean up this colossal mess, but it does not seem as though the company is even close to finished when it comes to doling out compensation.

If you have been affected by the 2010 BP oil spill, contact the dedicated Mississippi BP Oil Spill Claim Attorney at Barrett Law PLLC. No matter how you were effected, our legal team can help bring justice to you. Our team has the extensive experience and expertise you can count on in your fight against the BP oil spill.  Contact us today for a free, confidential consultation at (601) 790-1505.

/by

BP Oil Moving on As Victims Continue to Suffer

The fallout from the April 20, 2010 explosion and oil spill at the Macondo Prospect where oil churned out into the Gulf of Mexico for 87 days continues to negatively impact the residents, fishermen, and business owners living or working in the Gulf.  Recently, BP Oil has made some strides in its efforts to thwart payouts while it reaps the benefits of new business prospects.

After taking strenuous legal actions to prevent victims of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill from recovering damages under and agreed-upon settlement, BP America appears to be moving forward to a profitable future as Gulf Coast residents continue to face the emotional, physical, and economic toll of the environmental catastrophe.  In March 2014, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it was lifting its ban on awarding government contracts to BP.  In addition, BP announced, with triumphant colors flying, that the Gulf Coast clean-up had been completed.  Although this has been loudly denounced as incorrect, BP seems to believe that it has the right to start raking in the money while others continue to suffer.

The EPA announced that BP’s commitment to company-wide improvements in ethics and safety policies was sufficient to warrant the lifting of the ban, less than four years after the horrific blowout and oil spill.  BP has entered into a five-year deal with the EPA that will permit BP to enter into oil exploration leases for the deepwater areas in the Gulf of Mexico, where the evidence of the disastrous spill is still present.  Although this agreement merely allows BP to compete for the federal contracts, it is tantamount to welcoming BP back into the Gulf.

 In addition to earning back the right to compete for federal leases, despite the obstructionist legal tactics pursued by the company in fighting the settlement, BP has declared the Gulf Coast clean-up complete, even though it is far from over.  In an editorial piece that was published in a number of Gulf Coast papers, the chairman of BP America, John Mingé, stated that the active portion of the shoreline clean-up had been completed.  In response to this bombastic statement, the Coast Guard issued an official statement that the clean-up effort still was ongoing.  Mr. Mingé claimed that BP had spent $27 billion on the clean-up and that any additional claims for more environmental clean-up were merely attempts by individuals and businesses trying to get money for their causes.

BP has claimed that its about-face on fixing the harm that the Deepwater Horizon disaster caused is the result of greedy lawyers and improper claimants.  However, legal experts have commented on the absurdity of BP coming out swinging against the very deal that its legal experts assisted in crafting and promoted. The legal wrangling of BP has had some negative consequences for Gulf claimants as new rules about the payment of claims are drawn up.  Many claims have been delayed.  For those victims who have been suffering the consequences of the BP spill for four years now, the delays and turnabouts have caused them to wonder if they ever will get closure for the harm that they suffered.

Despite the assertions of BP Oil that the only reason it is fighting various aspects of the settlement is because of unscrupulous attorneys and greedy businesses, the fact is that real people continue to suffer financially, physically, and emotionally as the result of the negligence that led to one of the world’s worst environmental disasters.  The dedicated BP Oil Spill Attorneys at the Mississippi firm of Barrett Law PLLC remain committed to getting justice for oil spill victims.  To schedule a time to discuss your case in a free consultation, call us at (601) 790-1505.

/by

BP Settlement to Pay Medical Claims

People who have suffered harm as a result of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill may have reason to celebrate.  Specifically, they are one step closer to receiving compensation for the negative health consequences that the oil spill had on many people who lived or worked along the Gulf Coast after the April 20, 2010 blowout and spill.  After the appeals court in New Orleans dismissed BP’s attempt to modify the terms of its settlement agreement, the payment of claims can now move forward.  A large part of the $9.2 billion payment in this settlement is intended to cover the medical costs of these impacted by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

People have suffered from many different medical conditions as the result of the oil that poured into the Gulf Coast, including respiratory issues, skin rashes, and neurological problems.  The settlement is intended to compensate people for these consequences of the spill.  In addition, there are funds to cover medical exams for Gulf Coast residents for the next 21 years.  Further, BP has committed to fund a program geared towards making medical care more accessible for residents who live along the coast.  This will be paid for through a $105 million grant.  Although there are still many issues that need to be resolved, this is at least a start towards recovery.

In order to recover as part of this settlement, individuals must submit their claims by February 11, 2015.  There are additional requirements to be part of this group of claimants, including the fact that the person must have lived a half-mile or less from the water in beachfront areas or within one mile of the water in wetlands along the panhandle area of Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, or Florida during some part of 2010 after the spill.  Individuals who suffered negative health consequences as a result of participating in the oil clean-up also may recover as part of this settlement.  Depending upon the class into which the individual falls, the payment will vary.  Those people who worked to clean-up the oil spill are entitled to the largest payment, ranging up to a maximum of $60,700.  Residents who qualify may expect to receive between $900 and $36,950.  There are additional funds available based upon individual medical treatment costs.

In order to participate in the class settlement, the individual must relinquish all other claims against BP arising out of the Deepwater Horizon blowout and oil spill, with the exception that a person can bring additional claims if a medical condition develops after the settlement that can be attributed to the spill.  Claims like these are going to be difficult to prove.  Individuals still have the option of bringing claims against the owner of the Deepwater Horizon, Transocean, as well as Halliburton, which was a subcontractor involved with operations on the rig.

Although there have been a number of settlements, there still are a number of actions relating to the harm that the spill did to local and state governments, businesses, and other classes impacted by the spill and its aftermath.

As the four-year anniversary of the largest accidental offshore oil spill in history approaches, many people still wait for the relief  that BP promised in the aftermath of the environmental disaster.  Although the property damage was devastating, the medical conditions from which people suffered as a result of the spill also have wreaked havoc on the lives of those who lived in the Gulf Coast area.  At Barrett Law PLLC, our attorneys have the knowledge and experience to get victims of the BP oil spill the compensation that they deserve.  To schedule a free initial consultation, please call us at (601) 790-1505.  As part of our commitment to our clients, we only get paid if we successfully recover on your behalf.

/by

BP Ordered to Abide by Terms of $9.2 Billion Settlement

When the Deepwater Horizon had a catastrophic incident on April 20, 2010, 11 people were killed and 4.9 million gallons of oil poured into the Gulf of Mexico, forever altering the lives of many victims.  Despite the initial assertions by BP Oil to meet its financial obligations in the aftermath of the largest marine oil spill in history, they have fought the financial settlement that the company reached on a voluntary basis, taking it to an appeals court to contest the terms of the settlement.  The company did reach a settlement with many of the private plaintiffs in March of 2012, which concluded a pending legal action that was about to result in a civil trial.

In December 2013, BP halted payments under the terms of the $9.2 billion settlement it previously had reached.  Attorneys for BP Oil went to court to argue that the settlement covered losses that were not directly linked to the oil spill and should not be part of the payout. However, the federal Court of Appeals that heard the argument ruled that the terms of the settlement agreement did not require the offer of proof that the damage being claimed was the direct result of the oil spill.  This means that BP was required to resume the payments due under the terms of the settlement agreement.  The appeals court ruled that the company failed to satisfy its burden that the settlement agreement required a specific burden of proof.

The United States Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled that the “settlement agreement does not require a claimant to submit evidence that the claim was the result of the oil spill,” according to Judge Leslie Southwick.

The legal argument was based on the fact that claims were submitted that were not directly related to the Deepwater Horizon spill.  BP Oil claimed that the settlement did not cover claims that could not be directly linked to the spill.  For example, without any link to actual claims that were filed, a hotel on the Mississippi gulf coast that might have claimed damages related to loss of revenue based upon the aftermath of the oil spill would not be able to maintain such a claim against BP Oil under BP’s argument.  BP had argued that claimants that could not trace their losses directly to the spill caused by the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon should not be able to maintain their claims.  BP Oil denies that many of the claims that were filed pursuant to the settlement are the result of scientifically based methodology.  The Appeals Court struck down this argument.

As of early March 2014, BP Oil has paid 3.83 billion dollars in an effort to resolve more than 55,000 claims that have been submitted as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  In addition to the claims that were filed, there were legal claims submitted by 700 casinos, as well as an estimated 250 financial organizations, approximately 750 government entities, and 900 business entities, and other entities that allegedly were harmed as a result of the BP Oil spill that were instituted as a result of the efforts of the Obama administration.  These claims are not covered in the settlement reached by BP Oil.  BP has struggled in court to prove that the victims who submit claims must demonstrate that the economic harm was directly related to the spill in the Gulf of Mexico.  The Court determined that the settlement might have been more protective of the rights of BP Oil, but the terms were agreed to by the parties to the settlement and were not unreasonable.  The Court ruled that BP Oil would not be able to renegotiate the deal via the court system.

The BP Oil spill and other environmental disasters that have decimated the Mississippi coast have altered the lives of many people.  At Barrett Law PLLC, our team of Mississippi BP Oil Spill Attorneys work hard on behalf of the  people who have been decimated by the BP Oil spill and other horrific environmental events.  To schedule a free initial consultation, please call us at (601) 710-1505.  We do not collect our fee unless we recover compensation for the harm that you have suffered.

/by

The BP Oil Spill Settlement Dispute Continues

Though the four year anniversary of the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon oil spill is rapidly approaching, some individuals, businesses and nonprofits have still yet to receive settlement funds for their losses attributed to the disaster.  As the worst offshore oil spill in history, the event sparked thousands of suits against industry giant BP, along with Transocean Ltd. and Halliburton Co.  BP settled with most private plaintiffs back in 2012, but the settlement has become the source of much controversy, and BP is still fighting to see it rescinded.

Back in December of 2012, the United States District Court in New Orleans entered an order granting final approval of a settlement for plaintiffs in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and some parts of Western Florida that met financial formulas detailed in the settlement agreement.  The settlement was initially estimated at $8 billion but left uncapped.  It is now estimated to exceed $9.6 billion.

Though most thought this would be the end of the saga, just months later BP began to file an onslaught of motions attempting to halt the payout process being conducted by Deepwater Horizon Claims Administrator, attorney Patrick Juneau.  BP alleged that payments were being made to fictitious claimants and businesses, for fictitious losses that were not related to the spill.  After several hearings, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier rejected each claim.

BP filed an initial appeal to the Fifth Circuit disputing Patrick Juneau’s method for calculating payments, specifically stating he was applying an incorrect standard for determining business losses.  A three judge panel ordered that Judge Barbier reconsider some of the settlement terms regarding calculation of losses for businesses.

BP then filed another appeal, requesting the Fifth Circuit throw out the settlement unless Judge Barbier requires businesses to prove their losses were directly caused by the oil spill. This time, the Fifth Circuit rejected the appeal.

The divided three judge panel affirmed Judge Barbier’s 2012 ruling.  The appellate court found that Judge Barbier did not err in failing to determine whether eligible claimants have actually suffered any injury from the spill.  The court held that no laws or case precedence requires a district court to safeguard the interests of the defendant, when in most settlements the defendant can protect its own interests at the negotiating table.

BP has now requested the appellate court reconsider its January 10th decision.  The company argues in its filing that the Fifth Circuit erred in affirming the district court’s approval of the 2012 settlement.  It said the court’s January 10th ruling will force the company to pay out millions of dollars to businesses that were not actually harmed by the oil spill.  Lawyers for the company urge that the court should not have upheld Judge Barbier’s certification of the class as it was ill-defined.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers have publically stated that they believe BP undervalued the settlement and how many claimants would be eligible for payment.  Accordingly, the embattled giant is now searching for any and all means to escape full payouts under the settlement.  Many have questioned the wisdom of BP’s decision to continue to challenge Judge Barbier’s rulings, as he is also handling a separate suit against BP and has wide latitude to assess fines under the Clean Water Act.

Barrett Law PLLC has been involved in much of the litigation stemming from the BP oil spill and has successfully helped many claimants recover from their losses.  Though the time for filing a claim for damages for many individuals and businesses has now passed, if you suffered damages from the spill and would like more information concerning your rights, call us today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule a free initial consultation.

/by

BP Continues to Deny Validity of Damages

In an obvious attempt to win favor in the court of public opinion, BP recently launched an advertising campaign across the country attacking the validity of damages claimed as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill that occurred of the coast of the southeastern United States in April 2010.  BP criticized, though not by name, Chef Emeril Lagasse for making claims approximately $8 million in damages despite the fact that only three of his fourteen restaurants are located in the Gulf Coast region.  BP indicated that it ran the advertisement campaign to assure its stockholders that the company would not merely stand by while improper claims were paid.

To date, the claim of Emeril Lagasse’s business has not been paid. Lagasse’s restaurant management company, Emeril’s Homebase, responded to BP’s advertisement campaign by issuing a statement that it submitted claims in compliance with the procedure prescribed by the settlement agreement entered into by BP and administered by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, which is located in New Orleans.

Response to the ad campaign has not been favorable.  Blaine LeCesne, a law professor at Loyola University, stated that BP’s own poor efforts at settling claims resulted in a settlement agreement with the problems of which now complaints.  Nat Krasnoff, whose company Digital Designers has filed a claim that has yet to be paid because of BP’s efforts to block certain payments, said that he recognized the effort as one of BP trying to divert attention from the fact that it agreed to a formula that would result in both under-paid and over-paid claims.  He further commented that BP was certainly not complaining about the companies and the individuals that would be underpaid as a result of the settlement agreement.  The estimated costs associated with the Deepwater Horizon spill have risen to at least $9.6 billion, and will increase as the matter continues proceeding through the court system.

Class administrator Patrick Juneau issued a statement that the claim filed by Emeril Lagasse’s company met the requirements of a valid claim under the settlement agreement.  Additionally, because the award was in excess of $1 million, it needed to be affirmed by a three-person panel, which it was.

The dispute about what damages BP should be required to pay as result of the spill rages on.  Between April and September 2013, $1.3 billion in business loss claims were paid.  In the last several months, only four claims have been paid.  This was because of BP’s efforts in July 2013 to temporarily prevent payments to certain business for losses not directly resulting from the spill while the causation of those losses were evaluated.  In early December 2013, all payments for business losses were suspended by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.  The three-judge panel issued a directive to District Court Judge Carl Barbier that no payments were to be made to businesses whose damages are not traceable to the spill.  This is despite the fact that two BP attorneys expressly acknowledged in open court that BP contemplated paying losses that were not directly attributable to the oil spill.  BP has praised the recent directive, stating that it will return the settlement agreement to its intended function—to pay only claims that are directly attributable to the oil spill.

The claims period for filing a claim for damages resulting from the BP spill has largely passed for most business and individuals.  However, if you sustained damages as a result of the spill and have any questions about your rights, Barrett Law PLLC can be reached at (601) 790-1505 to discuss your legal options.

/by

BP Seeks Limitations on Settlement Agreement

The saga of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill continues to rage on, and the debate continues to grow over the interpretation of the settlement agreement designed to compensate business and individuals that suffered losses as a result of the oil spill.  The newest debate centers on whether the settlement agreement should remain in force.

In August 2013, attorneys for businesses that suffered damages as a result of the oil spill and the BP settlement claims administrator made a joint request to United States District Court Judge Carl Barbier to expand covered losses to additional businesses and claims.  These businesses include those that sustained losses as a result of the temporary, six-month suspension by the Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar, of deep water drilling activities.

On September 10, 2013, BP filed documents with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, located in New Orleans, objecting to the request for expansion, contending that the BP economic damages settlement, also referred to as the BP Spill Accord, was not intended to extend to moratorium-related losses.  The moratorium damages claims include those damages asserted by businesses in the offshore oil and gas industry, banks and financial institutions, and investment companies.

BP has again objected to paying claims—this time in a much more dramatic manner.  It has filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.  BP is arguing that, unless it is successful in disputing certain payments to businesses that BP contends suffered losses not directly attributable to the oil spill, the Fifth Circuit should rescind Judge Barbier’s approval of the settlement agreement.  Judge Barbier granted final approval of the settlement agreement on December 21, 2012.

According to BP’s attorneys, the interpretations of the claims administrator (Patrick Juneau) regarding the settlement terms has resulted in the approval of millions of dollars of payments to businesses for unsubstantiated losses.  BP is essentially contending that what it agreed to in the settlement agreement is not being adhered to or properly applied by Judge Barbier or Patrick Juneau.  BP is further contending that Juneau’s interpretation creates a conflict amongst members of the class, because some members are seeking recovery for actual damages and some members are seeking recovery for non-existent injuries.

Judge W. Eugene Davis, during oral arguments, questioned the delay in BP objecting to the payments.  BP’s attorney’s response was that BP did object.

In addition to BP’s attorneys, attorneys representing thousands of victims are likewise contending that approval of the settlement agreement should be rescinded.  According to Brent Coon, the settlement class is not an appropriate class in that it is composed of distinct groups that are dissimilar except that they lived, worked, or owned property somewhere in the region affected by the oil spill when it occurred.

Earlier this fall, BP appealed Judge Barbier’s interpretation of the settlement agreement, and a panel of appellate court judges ordered review of the interpretation and issued an order to Judge Barbier to suspend certain payments until the concerns about the settlement agreement could be worked out.   Payments to be suspended included those related to business economic losses.

Although the claims period for filing a claim for damages resulting from the BP spill have passed for many groups of businesses and individuals, if you sustained damages as a result of the spill and have any questions about your rights, Barrett Law, PLLC can be reached at (601) 790-1505 to discuss your options.

/by

Second Phase of BP Oil Spill Trial Concludes

The BP oil spill disaster, also known as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which occurred from April through June 2010, was the second largest oil spill in the world’s history and the largest accidental oil spill in the world’s history. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is second in size only to the intentional spill that occurred in the Arabian Gulf/Kuwait during the Persian Gulf War.

The Deepwater Horizon spill has resulted in a staggering number of claims. The spill also led to a lawsuit against BP by the United States Department of Justice and private plaintiffs. The first phase of the trial occurred over eight weeks from February through April 2013. It focused on whether BP, Transocean, Ltd., and Halliburton engaged in gross negligence, resulting in the Deepwater Horizon spill. Judge Carl J. Barbier presided over the first phase of the trial, and he has not yet ruled on whether BP, Transocean, Ltd., and Halliburton were grossly negligent in causing the spill.

The second phase of the trial began on September 30, 2013. Judge Barbier is also presiding, without a jury, over the second phase. The second phase of the trial focuses on attempts to stop the spill, or source control, as well as the size of the spill. Transocean, Ltd., and Halliburton are, ironically, now aligned with the United States Department of Justice as plaintiffs. Transocean, Ltd., and Halliburton are asserting that BP could have stopped the spill earlier by capping the well sooner. BP’s failures at source control, argue Transocean, Ltd., and Halliburton, thereby increased the amount of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico. BP’s failures at source control should thereby limit the financial liability of Transocean, Ltd., and Halliburton, their attorneys argue.

With regard to the size of the spill, the United States Department of Justice put on several key witnesses. One such witness was Mohan Kelkar, a professor of petroleum engineering at the University of Tulsa. Mr. Kelkar testified that between 4.5 and 5.5 million barrels of oil were released into the Gulf of Mexico over approximately three months. For reference, a barrel of oil contains 42 gallons. Mr. Kelkar’s calculations were based on the size of the physical Macondo reservoir, estimates of the amount of oil in the Macondo reservoir, and pre- and post-spill pressure readings.

Similarly, another key witness for the United States Department of Justice, was Mehran Pooladi-Darvish. Mr. Pooladi-Darvish is Vice President of Engineering at Fekete. Fekete is an oil reservoir engineering consulting firm. Mr. Pooladi-Darvish testified that between 5 million and 5.3 million barrels of oil were released in the Gulf of Mexico.

The United States Department rested its case on October 9, 2013.

Through the years since the spill, BP has maintained that only significantly less barrels were released than the United States Department of Justice contends. On October 10, 2013, BP began its defense of the second phase of the trial. One of its key witnesses, Martin Blunt, took the stand. Mr. Blunt is an assistant professor of petroleum engineering at Imperial College in Great Britain. Mr. Blunt testified that only 3.26 million barrels were released. Mr. Blunt attempted to discredit the testimony of Mr. Kelkar and Mr. Pooladi-Darvish by arguing that the latters’ estimates failed to account for the unique geology of the Macondo reservoir.

Depending upon the degree of negligence found by Judge Barbier and the size of the spill, BP could face fines of between $2.7 and $18 billion. The amount of penalties and fines levied against BP will be determined during the third phase of the trial, which will occur next year. If you have any questions about your rights pertaining to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Barrett Law PLLC can be reached at (601) 790-1505.

/by

BP Files Documents Opposing the Extension of the BP Settlement Agreement to Moratorium Damages

It is hard to believe that two-and-a-half years have elapsed since the Deepwater Horizon oil spill occurred of the coast of the southeastern United States.  Yet the effects are still being felt, and the dispute about what damages BP should be required to pay as result of the spill rages on.

Last month, attorneys for businesses that suffered damages as a result of the spill and the BP settlement claims administrator made a joint request to United States District Court Judge Carl Barbier to expand covered losses to additional businesses and claims.  These businesses include those that sustained losses as a result of the temporary, six-month suspension by the Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar, of deep water drilling activities.

The moratorium on deep water drilling activities was initially issued in May 2010, and was nullified by a restraining order issued by Judge Martin Leach-Cross Feldman.  The restraining order resulted from a lawsuit filed against Ken Salazar and the United States Department of Interior, among others, by Hornbeck Offshore Services, LLC, alleging that the moratorium was arbitrary and capricious and in violation of federal law.  In June 2010, Judge Feldman issue a restraining order, finding that Hornbeck Offshore Services, LLC, would likely ultimately succeed in establishing that the moratorium was arbitrary and capricious.  Several days after issuance of the restraining order, the United States Department of Interior appealed Judge Feldman’s ruling, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay enforcement of the restraining order.  As a result, in July 2010, the United States Department of Interior revised the previously-issued moratorium, which allowed certain drilling under certain conditions.  The United States Department of Interior lifted the revised moratorium in October 2010.

On September 10, 2013, BP filed documents with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, located in New Orleans, contending that the BP economic damages settlement, also referred to as the BP Spill Accord, was not intended to extend to moratorium-related losses.

Moratorium damages claims include those damages asserted by businesses in the offshore oil and gas industry, banks and financial institutions, and investment companies.  BP has consistently opposed paying such claims.  BP has asserted that the moratorium damages sustained were the result of the United States Department of Interior’s actions, not the actions of BP.  Furthermore, BP has argued that under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which is the key act governing BP’s liability for damages resulting from the spill, BP is not responsible for these types of damages.

The request for the extension of damages to a new class of businesses comes amidst recent allegations of wrongdoing and conflicts of interest against the claims administrator, Patrick Juneau, and several other attorneys in the handling of the BP settlement.  Former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and former federal judge, Louis Freeh, was appointed by Judge Barbier to conduct an independent investigation into the alleged wrongdoing.  Judge Freeh concluded that Juneau had engaged in no wrongdoing, but did determine that several of Juneau’s staff engaged in conduct that appeared to be improper, unethical and possibly criminal.  On September 6, 2013, Judge Freeh recommended that the United States Department of Justice engage in further investigation, but he also recommended that the payment of claims from the BP Spill Accord continue.  Judge Freeh will also continue his investigation.

The estimated costs associated with the Deepwater Horizon spill have risen to at least $9.6 billion, and will likely continue to increase as the matter continues proceeding through the court system.

Although the claims period for filing a claim for damages resulting from the BP spill have passed for many groups of businesses and individuals, if you sustained damages as a result of the spill and have any questions about your rights, Barrett Law, PLLC can be reached at (601) 790-1505 to discuss your options.

/by