By Anundra M. Dillon
As previously reported, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that Act 312 of 2006 is constitutional and reversed the district court’s judgment declaring Act 312 unconstitutional and unenforceable under La. Const. art. V, § 16, La. Const. art. I, § 4 and the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. M.J. Farms, Ltd. v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 2007-2371 (La. 7/1/08); ____ So. 2d ____. However, on page 30 of the Court’s Opinion in M.J. Farms, the Court stated:
In making this determination, we hasten to add that Act 312 exempts from its application all cases in which a contractual agreement exists between the parties that contains a remediation provision that exceeds state standards. La. Rev. Stat. §§ 30:29(A) and (H). It is only when no such proviso exists, that Act 312 mandates the state’s involvement.
Exxon Mobil Corporation and the State of Louisiana filed Applications for Rehearing asking the Court to modify, reconsider or strike this paragraph of the Court’s Opinion because Act 312 applied to all claims, including claims based on a contract that may contain a remediation provision that exceeds state standards.
On September 19, 2008, the Court granted the Applications for Rehearing in part and deleted the paragraph on page 30 from its Opinion. To read the Louisiana Supreme Court’s modified Opinion in M.J. Farms click on the following link: http://www.lasc.org/news_releases/2008/2008-58.asp. For more information regarding Act 312, please contact Robert B. McNeal (email@example.com) or Anundra M. Dillon (firstname.lastname@example.org).