Washington, D.C., associate Carlos Ramos-Mrosovsky authored an article, "Notable Cases: Comer V. Murphy Oil U.S.A., 585 F.3d 855 (5th Cir. 2009)," which was published in the April 2010 edition of ENR Global Report, a publication of the American Bar Association's Section of International Law International Energy & Natural Resources Committee.
According to Ramos-Mrosovsky, "Energy and environmental lawyers should pay careful attention to the Fifth Circuit's adjudication of Comer v. Murphy Oil U.S.A., 585 F.3d 855 (5th Cir. 2009), en banc review granted, No. 07-60756 (5th Cir. Feb. 26, 2010). In Comer, a Fifth Circuit panel reversed a lower court's dismissal of a nuisance action in which plaintiffs alleged that defendant energy companies' emissions of greenhouse gases had damaged plaintiffs' property by contributing to global warming that, in turn, worsened the impact of Hurricane Katrina. The Fifth Circuit's en banc review of the panel's decision will likely be a decisive point in the development of the law of global warming torts."
Ramos-Mrosovsky's article goes on to provide a brief background on the case and notes that "whatever the result en banc, Comer’s implications will be profound . . . [as] the Comer panel was the first to allow entirely private parties to bring tort claims of this kind. If allowed to stand, the Comer panel’s decision seems to permit all plaintiffs whose injuries can be somehow linked to global warming to sue any emitter of greenhouse gases subject to jurisdiction in a U.S. court."
Ramos-Mrosovsky concludes: "It is too early to predict how the Fifth Circuit will rule en banc. Comer will very likely be appealed to the Supreme Court as well. All that is certain is that the ultimate result in Comer will have far-reaching consequences for the global warming debate and for all participants in the carbon-based economy."