2025 Trial Lawyer of The Year Finalists

First constitutional climate change case ever to go to trial secures historic ruling from Montana Supreme Court striking down as unconstitutional a state law that forced government agencies to ignore greenhouse gas emissions when approving fossil fuel projects and declaring a fundamental right to a stable climate system.

In the first lawsuit of its kind to go to trial, more than a dozen children—from the ages of two to 18 whose stories represent all youth in Montana—secured a powerful Montana Supreme Court opinion holding that provisions of Montana’s Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) violated their constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment” because the statute forbade consideration of climate change impacts in the State’s environmental impact studies.

A group of environmental and constitutional lawyers filed a lawsuit in 2020 on behalf of 16 children, alleging that that Montana’s past and present approval of fossil fuel projects, and specific provisions of MEPA that prohibited state agencies from considering climate change when considering approval of fossil fuel projects, violated Montana youths’ rights to a clean and healthful environment, individual dignity, health, safety, and equal protection of the law under the Montana Constitution. While Montana is not a populous state, the state has one of the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the country.

The State aggressively defended the case, using every available avenue to avoid addressing the merits of the case. It tried to dismiss the case ten times (including two emergency petitions to the Montana Supreme Court) based on arguments ranging from lack of standing to the inability of the lawsuit to address a global problem. It filed motions attempting to force the minor plaintiffs to undergo psychiatric examinations, all while publicly attacking the minor plaintiffs.

After surviving these defense tactics, plaintiffs presented evidence during a seven-day trial in which 12 of the plaintiffs testified about their personal injuries caused by wildfires and smoke, drought, flooding, and extreme heat. Their testimony was backed by ten experts for the plaintiffs, including climate scientists, experts in greenhouse gas emissions accounting and fossil fuel permitting, public health experts, a renewable energy expert and an expert in climate impacts to tribal traditions. The trial court issued a landmark decision with 289 findings of fact and 67 conclusions of law, holding that the current greenhouse gas emissions levels are unconstitutionally degrading Montana’s environment and natural resources and violating plaintiffs’ fundamental rights, and that each additional ton of greenhouse gas pollution exacerbates plaintiffs’ injuries. Ultimately, the court found plaintiffs had standing, the challenged MEPA provisions were unconstitutional, and the State was enjoined from implementing them.

The State immediately appealed to the Montana Supreme Court and sought a stay of the trial court’s order, which stay was denied. In December 2024, the court ruled, 6 to 1, affirming the findings of the trial judge in full. The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice Mike McGrath, held that a stable climate system was “clearly within the object and true principles of the Framers[’] inclusion of the right to a clean and healthful environment” in Montana’s Constitution, becoming only the second Supreme Court in the nation to make such a declaration. In rejecting the State’s arguments that the constitutional protection was not meant to address global problems the State alone could not solve, Justice McGrath wrote:  “We reject the argument that the delegates—intending the strongest all-encompassing environmental protections in the nation, both anticipatory and preventative, for present and future generations— would grant the State a free pass to pollute the Montana environment just because the rest of the world insisted on doing so.”

The groundbreaking win in Held was built on a decade of other youth-led climate cases filed around the country by Our Children’s Trust, including a 2011 case that was filed directly with the Montana Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed that case on the basis that there were factual disputes about climate change. So, counsel worked with youth and experts throughout Montana to build the factual evidence for the Held case, and to develop and refine their legal theories. The Held victory sets the stage for science-based action on climate change in Montana, and provides a roadmap to hold other governments accountable for their actions that exacerbate climate change and harm youth.

Legal team: Nate Bellinger, Julia Olson, and Mat dos Santos of Our Children’s Trust; Phil Gregory of Gregory Law Group; Barbara Chillcott and Melissa Hornbein of Western Environmental Law Center; and Roger Sullivan of McGarvey Law. 

Twenty-seven-year battle against alumina refinery plant for negligent storage of red mud piles containing carcinogen—a byproduct of the refining process–resulted in significant recoveries for low-income St. Croix residents affected by hurricane which blew toxic red dust on to their properties.

This case was part of a 27-year struggle against the multinational aluminum manufacturer Alcoa Corporation over its negligent storage of bauxite and bauxite-containing red mud piles, resulting in toxic red dust coating historically poor neighborhoods, and causing severe personal injuries and property damage. After class certification, class de-certification, multiple Third Circuit appeals, refiling of close to 3000 individual lawsuits, thousands of depositions, and preparation for trial, the case settled for a substantial, though confidential, amount, resulting in significant recoveries for all the plaintiffs.

This marathon of a litigation was undertaken to correct wrongs of placing a known pollutant in a historically poor and underserved neighborhood of public- and lower-income housing populated by people who had come to St. Croix in search of a better life.  Alcoa knowingly allowed the red dust to spread to harm more than 6000 people. 

In the early 1960’s, Alcoa built an alumina manufacturing plant on St. Croix where a refinery had been previously located. Alcoa used bauxite (sold by Glencore) in its alumina production. As bauxite is refined, it creates a byproduct referred to as “red dust.”  Bauxite is classified by IARC as a Group 1, “Carcinogenic to humans.” It also causes skin and eye irritation. Bauxite contains silica, titanium dioxide, and iron oxide, all dangerous with over-exposure.

The red mud had been stored for years in huge piles on the many acres of the Alcoa property. From a distance, it looked like rolling red mountains across the horizon. Alcoa and Glencore failed to plant sod or other vegetation on the red mud piles, allowing dust to blow if the ground was dry or the wind high.  

In addition to the red mud piles on the property, Alcoa stored unprocessed bauxite in an open rubber shed on the property. In 1989, Alcoa’s subsidiary determined that the bauxite storage facility should be fully enclosed, requiring a $3,000,000 renovation. Alcoa never performed the recommended renovation.

In 1995, six years after the renovations were recommended, Hurricane Marylin blew a huge hole in the roof of the open-air bauxite shed. Alcoa never repaired this hole. Three years later, in 1998, St. Croix was hit with Hurricane Georges. The rain and hurricane-force winds blew bauxite out of the unsecure, rubber bauxite shed and took the tops off the red mud hills. It blew bauxite downwind for miles into the nearby homes. The bauxite and red mud blew straight through their open windows and coated the homes, inside and out, with the toxic substances. 

The first class action for this case was filed in the then-named Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands on February 5, 1999. Defendants removed the case to the District Court of the Virgin Islands. Plaintiffs moved for class certification on November 15, 1999, and class certification was granted on August 7, 2000. An appeal to the Third Circuit upheld the certification. A new judge was appointed, and the class was de-certified in 2008. Multiple appeals to the Third Circuit ensued, followed by refiling of the class, another attempted removal, remand, and an important assertion of the “Local Controversy” exception to 28 U.S.C. §1332(d)(4)(A), under which remand to the local court was granted. Defendants attempted to appeal the remand, again to the Third Circuit, but the petition was denied in April 2011. Substantive litigation continued until the eve of trial, when the parties reached a tentative settlement in August 2024, subject to approval of all plaintiffs. The settlement was finalized on December 27, 2024, and monetary distributions occurred in 2025.

Legal team: Lee J. Rohn and Rhea R. Lawrence of Lee J. Rohn & Associates, LLC; and Rick Yelton and Jayde Encalade of Burns Charest LLP. 

Product liability and consumer protection lawsuits secured an unprecedented $8.3 billion in combined verdicts against bottled water company that poisoned consumers with rocket fuel chemical.

After three years of complex litigation, a legal team secured $8.3 billion in verdicts—the largest in Nevada history—against Real Water on behalf of victims injured by hydrazine-contaminated bottled water, establishing groundbreaking product liability standards requiring food and beverage manufacturers to properly test products before sale, setting new punitive damages standards, and transforming consumer protection law.

Affinitylifestyles.com Inc., a company based in Las Vegas and doing business as Real Water, marketed its bottled water as “the healthiest drinking water available.” But the water contained hydrazine—a toxic chemical used in rocket fuel—causing over 100 people to suffer acute liver failure. Among the victims were at least six children, and two adult victims required liver transplants.

First filed in 2021, the lawsuits on behalf of 13 victims proceeded under theories of strict product liability for design defect, manufacturing defect, and failure to warn, alongside claims of negligence and breach of warranty. After the defendant’s insurance carriers made settlement offers characterized by one judge as “shockingly low,” the legal team was forced to prepare and execute two separate trials before two separate judges—the 14-day Wren trial (May-June 2024) and the 12-day Brown trial (October 2024)—ultimately securing the largest verdicts in Nevada history and setting industry-wide testing standards for manufacturers. The Wren verdict for 8 victims totaled $104,676,944.05 in compensatory damages plus $3 billion in punitive damages, while the Brown verdict for 15 victims reached $269,287,678.60 in compensatory damages with an additional $5 billion in punitive damages.

Throughout the litigation, from filing of the first complaint through the jury verdicts, the legal team demonstrated tenacity and strategic innovation, navigating through complex procedural hurdles including bankruptcy proceedings and insurer defense tactics. They managed consolidated claims from multiple plaintiffs with diverse medical presentations while establishing causation between their injuries and a specific chemical contaminant. This necessitated coordination of complex scientific evidence spanning toxicology, hepatology, and chemical analysis. Also, the bankruptcy filing by Real Water created significant procedural complications, requiring the attorneys to continue aggressive litigation against both the manufacturer and its insurers.

Significantly, the legal team successfully refuted defense claims that manufacturers have no testing obligations unless they have advance notice of a specific contaminant in their product. The jury agreed with the plaintiffs that non-targeted testing was required. The attorneys also established innovative settlement allocation formulas to maximize recovery for plaintiffs, which are expected to become standard practice in Nevada courts. Further, the legal team developed effective punitive damages instructions specifically designed to deter industry-wide misconduct in cases where the primary defendant is insolvent.

The verdicts have triggered industry-wide reassessment of quality control protocols, with companies implementing more rigorous testing procedures to avoid similar liability. Additionally, the litigation has laid groundwork for subsequent bad faith cases against insurers who reject reasonable settlement offers, extending the impact well beyond the immediate defendants.

Legal team: Will Kemp, Eric M. Pepperman, and Breanna K. Switzler of Kemp Jones, LLP; and Theodore Parker, III of Parker, Nelson & Associates.