Magistrate: no proven injuries in plant fire

Claims stemmed from 1993 refinery fire in East Coker Unit of Baton Rouge Exxon Chemical Plant; fire produced smoke plume

The Associated Press

Thousands of people who claim they were injured by the smoke plume from an Exxon refinery fire 12 years ago may never get to plead their case before a jury.

A federal magistrate is recommending all the claims be dismissed.

In a 20-page report made public Jan. 27, U.S. Magistrate Stephen Riedlinger said none of the plaintiffs — including those who lived in the area clouded by the plume — has proven they were injured.

U.S. District Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn of Dallas, who is overseeing the cases, will issue a final ruling after reviewing Riedlinger’s findings.

The report affects nearly 5,700 people who have sued ExxonMobil, seeking unspecified damages for an August 1993 fire in the East Coker Unit of the Exxon Chemical Plant in Baton Rouge. Another 6,175 people have asserted administrative claims against the company over the incident.

Smoke plume moved east from refinery

Riedlinger wrote that those who lived outside the plume “have no provable claims for physical injuries because they were not exposed to anything which could have caused them physical harm.”

Those who did live in the area of the plume, the magistrate said, offered no evidence of “a sufficient exposure to any harmful chemical or substance” that might have caused injury.

ExxonMobil attorney Charles McCowan Jr. of Baton Rouge said Jan. 27 it was his practice not to comment on pending litigation. George Pietrogallo Jr., a public affairs adviser for the company, said ExxonMobil is happy with the report.

“It properly applies the law,” he said. “But it’s important to recognize the report still must be reviewed and approved by the district judge, and we can’t really speculate on what a district judge might do.”

Patti Durio Hatch, Walter Dumas and Paul Dué, Baton Rouge lawyers who are representing those who sued, did not return calls seeking comment. Lawyer Rebecca Cunard referred questions to “our spokesman” Denham Springs attorney Calvin Fayard, who also did not return a call.

Lynn is considering whether to certify the case for class-action.

But in the report, Riedlinger contends it was appropriate for the judge to first decide whether the cases have merit “to avoid needless and costly litigation of claims which the controlling law does not recognize, are spurious or which do not have — and never will have — evidentiary support.”

Among the magistrate’s other findings:

• The plaintiffs offered no evidence that the amount of carbon particles in the air was “harmful to humans.” Even in the area of the smoke plume, Riedlinger said, the concentration was at least 10 times lower “than relevant exposure limits and did not pose a health risk to members of the community.”

• The plaintiffs didn’t prove ExxonMobil intentionally inflicted emotional distress on the community, Riedlinger said, “nor have they offered any evidence showing that the conduct of ExxonMobil was so extreme and outrageous as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency.”

The report was in response to a June 2003 ExxonMobil motion for summary judgment, which asked that all the claims be dismissed.

In opposing that request, a steering committee for the plaintiffs wrote that dismissal “would obviously make a mockery of the fundamental rights afforded through our judicial process.”

Dismissal of the lawsuits would end one of the oldest pending matters in Baton Rouge federal court. The thousands of lawsuits swamped the court’s docket more than a decade ago, giving its judges the highest caseload in the nation. That prompted Congress to add another judge in Baton Rouge, resulting in the appointment of current U.S. District Chief Judge Ralph Tyson.