A North Dakota judge has significantly reduced the amount that the environmental group Greenpeace must pay a Texas-based oil company over protests against a pipeline that took place nearly a decade ago.
A jury awarded the company, Energy Transfer, $667 million after a trial in March, in which the company accused Greenpeace of orchestrating protests in 2016 and 2017 against the Dakota Access Pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation south of Bismarck, N.D. Greenpeace countered that it had played only a supporting role in peaceful protest activity.
Judge James D. Gion, who presided over the trial in county court in Mandan, N.D., wrote in an 18-page ruling dated Oct. 28 that the three-week trial had required the jury to consider an overwhelming amount of evidence. He adjusted the award based on technical matters of law. For example, in some instances Energy Transfer had accused Greenpeace of trespassing but did not demonstrate ownership of the land in question, he found. Judge Gion also reduced the amount of damages awarded for defamation.
Greenpeace had warned that the outsize verdict could force its American wing into bankruptcy. On Wednesday, Marco Simons, the interim general counsel for Greenpeace USA, said the group was still analyzing the ruling, which lowered the award to roughly $345 million from $667 million.
“We still believe that the remaining claims are legally unfounded,” he said, adding that the case was “about a wealthy corporation using the legal system to intimidate its critics and muzzle protesters who threaten its business model.”
He said that the group was still awaiting a final decision from the same judge and that it was planning to file a motion for a new trial. “If that is denied, we will proceed with an appeal, and are confident in the strength of our legal arguments,” he said.
Vicki Granado, a spokeswoman for Energy Transfer, said the company would appeal the lower award. “We firmly believe that the original jury findings and damages awards for conspiracy and defamation are lawful and just,” she said.
Two Greenpeace USA entities were sued in the case, along with Greenpeace International, the umbrella group that operates around the world. The latter has filed a countersuit against Energy Transfer in the Netherlands. Judge Gion previously denied a request from the company to issue an injunction to stop Greenpeace from pursuing that case.
Daniel Simons, who is the senior legal counsel for strategic defense for Greenpeace International and is no relation to Marco Simons, said his group would continue to fight the case in the United States and in Europe. Its countersuit cites a new European Union directive designed to fight so-called SLAPP suits, or strategic lawsuits against public participation. Essentially, SLAPP suits are legal actions designed to stifle critics. Many U.S. states have provisions barring them, but North Dakota does not.
“We are determined to ensure that Energy Transfer’s bullying lawsuits eventually backfire, to defend our own and others’ freedom of expression,” Daniel Simons said.
Karen Zraick covers legal affairs for the Climate desk and the courtroom clashes playing out over climate and environmental policy.
The post Judge Cuts Greenpeace Pipeline Protest Award Nearly in Half appeared first on New York Times.
