A glimpse into Supreme Court deliberations
Fri, February 29, 2008
Posted in Alaska News, Top Stories
Now that the Supreme Court has heard the Exxon Valdez punitive damages case, both sides will have to wait months for a decision. But there’s been some confusion over what alternatives the court has in making that decision. For some clarification, we called Bo Rutledge, a Supreme Court expert, who teaches law at Catholic University. He reviewed the oral arguments in the case and says the justices now have four options.
Lori Townsend, APRN - Anchorage
Comments
One Comment to “A glimpse into Supreme Court deliberations”
-
Search
-
datebook49.com
See the full calendar
Submit your event
Latest Participation
John Pender -- Hiya- Given Alaska’s recent interest in renewable energy you might want to look...- adam martin -- i think polar bears are the best creatures on this earth and yes they are becoming...
- richard olson -- I like the idea of energy assistance to Alaskans. The cost of fuel is so high when...
- Attu « O’Folks -- purposes of cremation and immediate re-burial in situ rather than...
Site Credits
Site Policies
Contact Us
Hello! I live in Anchorage, Orig. from Kodiak and am on the list of those collecting damages if awarded. I have a few questions about the case;
First, Maritime law. Isn’t it out dated? With cell phones, GPS and everything else, this isn’t a world of, “He was at sea.. how can we know what he does out there?” anymore.. right? Isn’t this a very obvious point?
Second; I know a common law practice is to use a previous case to support a current one. If Exxon wins, will this case support every outdated law in the country.. (example would be old laws still active in states like the Carolinas and orig. 13 colony states that have been around for almost as long as Maritime law.. 200 years or so since our country was founded), and will every ship boat captain be able to do whatever they want with no danger to the company they work for?
Does that mean there should be a system in place to hold the Captain responsible if there were another disaster, and if so, how can this one man possibly compensate a state like AK if this happens again and he’s to be held responsible? Would there have to be an insurance company established for such a purpose… and would an insurance company be a good option? Of course a captain couldn’t afford to pay out a 5 billion dollar settlement… but neither can most insur. companies!.. Oil Tanker Captain Insurance?? Lol.. Am I naive on this? If someone were to sue, who would pay if not the employer? Wouldn’t this case going to Exxon support these consequences in future cases?
The very idea that Exxon believes the clean up costs should decline the damages in the case is a slap in the face! They haven’t cleaned up the devastation of the effected communities… what about THAT clean up???!
Third; How can Exxon possibly say they’re not subject to Punitive Damages since there seems to be a small laundry list of people claiming to have had knowledge of the captains drinking problem? Why is this not just slapping the judges in the face with an obnoxiously large amount of, “duh”??
If you reply plz do so to my email in case I miss your broadcast.
Thanks for your time
Stacy