Chevron v. Donziger
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
768 F. Supp. 2d 581 (2011)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Texaco, predecessor to Chevron Corporation (Chevron) (plaintiff) had a drilling operation in the Lago Agrio oil field in the Amazon rainforest region of Ecuador. People living near the oil field (the Lago Agrio inhabitants) (defendants) hired attorney Steven Donziger (defendant) and sued Chevron in the United States, alleging that Texaco’s operations in Ecuador destroyed and polluted the rainforest, causing harm to the inhabitants and their livelihoods. The district court dismissed the complaint, and the court of appeals affirmed the dismissal. The Lago Agrio inhabitants refiled their case in Ecuador. In 2002, a court in Ecuador awarded the Lago Agrio inhabitants over $18 billion in damages. The Lago Agrio inhabitants made it known that it was their intention to seek to collect on the judgment as soon as possible, prior to the resolution of the appellate process in Ecuador. Chevron filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking a declaratory judgment that the judgment in Ecuador was not enforceable. Chevron claimed that Donziger violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, in that Donziger and other attorneys had procured the Ecuadorian judgment through fraud. Chevron moved for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kaplan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.