United States v. Citgo Petroleum Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
801 F.3d 477 (2015)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Citgo Petroleum Corporation (Citgo) (defendant) operated two oil-water separator tanks but failed to install the required tank covers. Migratory birds fell into the uncovered tanks and died. The United States (the government) (plaintiff) charged Citgo with illegally taking migratory birds in violation of the takings ban in the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), a strict-liability misdemeanor. Citgo challenged, arguing that (1) the MBTA’s takings ban prohibited only the intentional killing, hunting, or poaching of migratory birds and (2) the ban did not apply to omissions that resulted in unintentional bird deaths, such as Citgo’s failure to cover its separator tanks. The district court ruled against Citgo, holding that (a) Citgo was liable because the MBTA’s takings ban covered unintentional acts and omissions that resulted in migratory bird deaths and (b) because the MBTA’s takings ban imposed strict liability, the government needed to prove only that Citgo’s failure to cover the tanks was the proximate cause of the birds’ deaths. Citgo appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
