Replies to post #1540 on The Rising Influence of Rising Affluence

[DewDiligence]

CVX—for comic relief…
Ecuador Disbars Judge Who Heard Chevron Case

http://www.reuters.com/article/idAFN2815738920101029

›Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:59pm EDT
By Alexandra Valencia

QUITO, Oct 28 (Reuters) - Ecuador's judicial authorities have disbarred a judge who had been accused of misconduct and involvement in a bribery scheme in a high profile oil pollution lawsuit against Chevron Corp (CVX).

Juan Nunez had denied any wrongdoing but recused himself from the case in September 2009 after he was recorded discussing the 18-year-old legal battle with men who secretly videotaped him using cameras hidden in a watch and a pen.

The lawsuit has triggered related legal actions in several U.S. courts and an international arbitration, and is being closely watched by the oil industry for precedents that could lead to other large claims against companies.

The Judicial Council said it had disbarred Nunez in a resolution dated Wednesday and seen by Reuters on Thursday. It said he had broken legal regulations by expressing his opinion on the case before its conclusion [LMAO].

Residents of Ecuador's Amazon region say faulty drilling practices by Texaco, which was bought by Chevron in 2001, destroyed big areas of the jungle in the 1970s and 1980s.

"The Council's action shows that the court system is not biased against Chevron and is functioning properly," said Karen Hinton, spokeswoman for the Ecuadorians suing Chevron.

"Chevron's argument it can't get a fair trial is a fantasy dreamed up to try and block our efforts to collect damages in the United States."

Chevron has said Texaco cleaned up all the parts of the jungle that it was responsible for. The U.S. company welcomed the move against Nunez but said the case suffered from corruption.

"What Judge Nunez did was clearly wrong and it was obvious that he should be disbarred," said Chevron spokesman James Craig.

The current judge in the lawsuit, Nicolas Zambrano, is the third Ecuadorean to hear the case. He took over this month, replacing Nunez's successor, Leonardo Ordonez.

Chevron had called for Ordonez to be replaced, saying he failed to investigate evidence of collusion between the plaintiffs and a court-appointed expert who came up with what it said was a fraudulent damages assessment of up to $27 billion.‹

[DewDiligence]

Ecuador rules against CVX in environmental suit, but
everyone knows the case is a scam and CVX has no
assets in Ecuador anyhow. CVX is +1% today.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Illegitimate-Judgment-against-bw-1293513358.html?x=0&.v=1

›Illegitimate Judgment against Chevron in Ecuador Lawsuit

Monday February 14, 2011, 1:26 pm

SAN RAMON, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Chevron Corporation (NYSE:CVX) today announced there has been an adverse judgment from the Provincial Court of Justice of Sucumbíos in Lago Agrio, Ecuador in an environmental lawsuit involving Texaco Petroleum Company.

In response to the ruling, Chevron issued the following statement:

“The Ecuadorian court’s judgment is illegitimate and unenforceable. It is the product of fraud and is contrary to the legitimate scientific evidence. Chevron will appeal this decision in Ecuador and intends to see that justice prevails.

“United States and international tribunals already have taken steps to bar enforcement of the Ecuadorian ruling. Chevron does not believe that today’s judgment is enforceable in any court that observes the rule of law.

“Chevron intends to see that the perpetrators of this fraud are held accountable for their misconduct.”

More information can be found at http://www.chevron.com/ecuador .‹

[DewDiligence]

US Court rules for CVX in Ecuador environmental suit:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304815004579419081800950164

A federal judge ruled in favor of Chevron Corp. on Tuesday in a civil racketeering case, saying a record $9.5 billion environmental judgment in Ecuador against the oil giant was "obtained by corrupt means." U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan found that New York lawyer Steven Donziger and his litigation team engaged in coercion, bribery, money laundering and other criminal conduct in pursuit of the 2011 verdict.

The decision barred Mr. Donziger and his two Ecuadorean co-defendants from profiting from the verdict.

CVX has no assets in Ecuador; hence, unless the Ecadorean plaintiffs can attach CVX’s assets in third-party countries, which seems unlikely, the overhang from this lawsuit would seem to be over. The reason CVX is up only slightly today is that few investors took the original legal judgment in Ecuador seriously (#msg-54460930).

[DewDiligence]

CVX continues to make headway fighting Ecuador environmental suit:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/business/energy-environment/patton-boggs-settles-dispute-with-chevron-over-pollution-case.html

The powerful Washington law firm Patton Boggs dropped out of an effort to force Chevron to pay a $9.5 billion Ecuadorean pollution judgment on Wednesday, expressing regrets for its involvement in the case and agreeing to pay the oil company $15 million in settlement payments.

…Patton Boggs had served as a leading firm in a global effort to enforce the 2011 Ecuadorean judgment against Chevron in Argentina, Brazil, Canada and potentially in other countries where Chevron has assets [because CVX owns no assets in Ecuador itself].

Chevron has long asserted that Patton Boggs was involved in a vast fraud and cover-up that led to the Ecuadorean judgment… Patton Boggs’s surrender should help Chevron in its efforts to block enforcement in foreign courts.

…In the agreement, Patton Boggs agreed to assign to Chevron all rights and claims to any future payments received by the firm in the case and to remove itself as a representative in any future proceedings. The firm had a 5 percent stake in any future judgments against Chevron, potentially worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Perhaps most significantly, the firm also agreed to allow Chevron’s lawyers to take depositions from Patton Boggs’s lawyers.

The investment community never took this lawsuit seriously by modeling a sizable judgment; now, it’s likely that most analysts will discount the suit altogether if they weren’t doing so already.