An Oregon judge had stern words for the attorneys representing Multnomah County in its climate lawsuit, criticizing their handling of evidence and lack of transparency during a hearing on Thursday. 

Oregon Circuit Court Judge Benjamin Souede heard arguments on a defendant’s motion to strike two climate studies cited in the County’s filings. The motion, filed last month, detailed how the County’s counsel, Roger Worthington, was involved in the preparation and funding of the studies – despite the plaintiff’s treatment of the studies as independent sources. 

Although Judge Souede said he would ultimately deny the motion to strike, he did so based on Oregon’s narrow legal definition of fraud, not on the merits of the plaintiff’s actions. And he made clear that he found those actions troubling:  

“Almost a gob smacking failure by plaintiff to do anything close to what we expect a counsel and a party to do in litigation, especially in litigation that is well-funded, that is hard-fought, that is complicated, that is about important issues.  

“I just want to say it clearly, it is not acceptable to submit a declaration by an expert that is based in part on a reliance on a scientific article that plaintiff’s counsel helped to fund without pointing out to the Court that that is so.” [emphasis added] 

Alongside Souede’s scalding appraisal of the climate litigation attorney’s conduct, let’s look at what other issues of the case’s evidence the hearing revealed. 

Read the full post on EIDClimate.org.