For the latest readers arriving to this blog, I periodically have short descriptions of upcoming material under the “Watch this space” title. Up next: Who knows what the San Francisco law firm Sher Edling was thinking when they filed their johnny-come-lately 7/15/24 Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico v. Exxon lawsuit, apart from seeing they were going to possibly miss out on the Big Oil cash settlements if the 11/22/22 Municipalities of Puerto Rico lawsuit and the 12/13/23 San Juan lawsuit managed to score that loot. An educated guess on why Sher Edling voluntarily dismissed Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico mere days ago stems from their notice being sent to U.S. District Court Judge Aida M. Delgado-Colon — the same judge who mere weeks ago admonished the Efron PC law firm for plagiarizing San Juan almost in its entirety from Municipalities of Puerto Rico. As I illustrated last year, Sher Edling was seemingly plagiarizing from CA v Exxon, a practice that’s becoming ever more clear to see across all of this climate lawfare situation. Best for Sher Edling not to risk drawing even the slightest attention to that with Judge Delgado-Colon.

But erasure of that lawsuit win opportunity is offset by Sher Edling filing Hawaii v BP, the latest in their boilerplate series of filings. I’ll run through the standard fatal faults with it shortly here, and point out where Sher Edling is digging a deeper hole for themselves on at least one particular false accusation of theirs.

Meanwhile, please do scroll down this page for my completed posts, and return soon to see how the next one coming up will fill in this space.