Response to “No, Really, Civil Procedure Matters: Look at the State and Local Climate Cases”
It all starts with civil procedure. Professor Sean Lyness’s article No, Really, Civil Procedure Matters: Look at the State and Local Climate Cases, emphasizes the implications of civil procedure by highlighting cases involving state and local governments’ climate change lawsuits against fossil fuel companies. The cases demonstrate that procedural intricacies, such as jurisdiction and venue questions, can significantly impact the outcome of legal disputes. The article argues that a sophisticated understanding of procedural rules and strategies is essential for effective advocacy and successful litigation.
In its most basic form, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require litigants to follow the procedural aspect of the law. The rules are mandatory but not inflexible, thus allowing creative litigants to look for loopholes to either exploit or close. Professor Lyness’s article underscores “the primacy of procedure,” signaling that the seemingly diminutive choices can make a critical difference during legal proceedings. Many cases won’t even make it past the initial stages of litigation because of civil procedure strategy. So, before law students roll their eyes at civil procedure, they ought to look again.
Notably, the article focuses on state and local climate cases to demonstrate how careful attention to procedural details really matters. For instance, in Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. BP P.L.C., the Fourth Circuit concluded that Baltimore’s climate case be remanded to state court after the plaintiffs deliberately framed their case by excluding any federal subject matter jurisdiction in state court. They strategically countered attempts by the defendants to remove the case to federal court—generally because large corporations tend to favor a more ‘neutral’ federal court. Similar procedural wins have been attained in other climate change lawsuits across different circuits, emphasizing the substantive implications of procedural decisions in shaping the life of a case.
Moreover, the article contrasts effective procedural strategies with ill-fated results, such as the dismissal of New York City's climate lawsuit ascribable to procedural missteps, with filing the case in federal court and framing it in terms that led to dismissing the claims.
So, if you hold the notion that civil procedure is trivial or mundane, No, Really, Civil Procedure Matters: Look at the State and Local Climate Cases asserts the pivotal role of civil procedure in shaping a case, particularly claims with sweeping societal implications—like climate change litigation. After all, a danger foreseen is half avoided, so if you want to play, you’ve got to know the rules. And the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure really matter.
