In re Deepwater Horizon: United States v. B.P. Exploration & Production, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
753 F.3d 570, 2014 AMC 1521 (2014)
- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
The Deepwater Horizon was an offshore-drilling vessel that was owned and operated by Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling Inc. (Transocean) (defendant). The Deepwater Horizon had been involved in the drilling of an underwater oil well owned by B.P. Exploration & Production, Inc. (B.P.) and Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (Anadarko) (defendants) and was still connected to the well by a 5,000-foot-long riser. As a result of a failure of cement in the well and a failure of a blowout preventer on the riser, a blowout of oil from the well occurred. Oil burst up through the riser onto the Deepwater Horizon, caught fire, and engulfed the vessel. The Deepwater Horizon eventually capsized and sank, and the riser connecting the vessel and the well was severed. Oil poured from the well into the ocean for almost three months before the well could be successfully capped. Among other suits related to the incident, the United States (plaintiff) sued Transocean, B.P., and Anadarko seeking civil penalties under the Clean Water Act. Transocean settled with the government. The district court granted summary judgment for the United States on a number of issues, including civil-penalty liability for B.P. and Anadarko as the well owners for the subsurface discharge of the oil. B.P. and Anadarko appealed, alleging that the discharge occurred from the riser rather than the well.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Benavides, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 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.