Failing People Failed Machines: Judge’s ruling gives picture as to what caused BP environmental disaster
September 25, 2014
Making the LOOP
September 25, 2014
Many judges say one of the aspects of their work is the window it gives them into knowledge and worlds they themselves have never experienced, and how the need to familiarize themselves with foreign concepts is sometimes one of the more challenging aspects of the job.
The findings of fact and conclusions of law issued by U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier, in which he found oil giant BP grossly negligent and reckless in connection with the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, contain detailed descriptions of what occurred on board the rig, based on witness testimony and documents.
David Arceneaux, the chief judge of the 32nd Judicial District, which covers Terrebonne Parish, makes a habit of reading the latest U.S. Supreme Court rulings and decisions of other high courts.
So he consented easily when he was asked by The Times to review the Barbier’s decision.
Arceneaux, a native of Bourg, earned his bachelor’s degree from Nicholls State University and went on to Louisiana State University for his law degree, was admitted to the bar in 1978, and served on the bench for the past 15 years.
His task was not to pass comment on Barbier’s findings – something his adherence to judicial ethics would have allowed – but on the work that went into the decision, all 153 pages of it, much as a law professor might do.
Arceneaux gave his federal colleague a glowing review.
“I can’t help but be impressed by his thorough explanation of the history of the various court actions,” he said, citing “Judge Barbier’s careful analysis of each court proceeding and the law applicable to the same, and the straightforward and simple explanation of his findings.
Arceneaux said in every case referred to a judge, whether simple or complex, the parties are entitled to thoughtful deliberation and precise explanations of the court’s reasoning.
“Anything short of such an effort contributes to an impression of arbitrariness, and, ultimately, disrespect for judges and judicial proceedings,” Arceneaux said. “In this case, even those who might disagree with his ultimate conclusions should be impressed by Judge Barbier’s presentation of the facts and issues, and his careful analysis of those facts and the law.”
Arceneaux noted that in a case of such magnitude – there are billions of dollars at stake and allegations of wrongful deaths, environmental damage, and millions, possibly billions of dollars lost by businesses – it is safe to assume that all parties are represented by highly competent counsel.
“When good lawyers in a case tug at a judge from every angle on every important fact and legal conclusion, it can be difficult for the judge to separate the wheat from the chaff,” he said. “As a judge who deals with similar situations everyday, although on a much smaller scale, I must say I admire the job Judge Barbier has done.”
