Multnomah County, Ore. (Nov. 3, 2026) — The Multnomah County Circuit Court has denied all but one of the more than 20 motions to dismiss filed by fossil fuel companies and industry trade associations in the County’s climate accountability lawsuit.
In an order signed Nov. 2, 2026, in County of Multnomah v. Exxon Mobil Corp., et al., Case No. 23CV25164, the Honorable Adele J. Ridenour cleared the way for the case, filed roughly three and a half years ago, to proceed in Oregon state court.
Read the ruling here:
The County alleges that the defendants knew for decades that fossil fuel consumption would drive climate change, yet waged a campaign of deception to sow public doubt and sell more fossil fuel products, contributing to regional harms such as the 2021 Heat Dome and wildfires.
The County asserts claims for intentional and negligent public nuisance, negligence, fraud and deceit, and trespass, and seeks more than $51 billion in damages and declaratory relief.
“The Court validated what we have been saying from day one. This case deserves to be heard on the merits and Multnomah County wants its day in court," Multnomah County Chair Jessica Vega Pederson said.
Court rejects preemption, political question, and separation of powers arguments
Following oral arguments on June 24 and 25, 2026, the Court denied the defendants’ joint Rule 21 motion, rejecting the argument that the County’s claims are preempted by the Clean Air Act because they seek to regulate interstate and international emissions.
Focusing on the complaint’s actual language, the Court explained that “the County’s claims rely on a theory of causation that involves interstate (and/or international) greenhouse gas emissions, [but] the conduct from which the County’s claims allegedly arise is that of defendants’ alleged misrepresentations and/or failures to disclose/warn,” and that “[i]t is that conduct which forms the gravamen of the County’s claims.”
The Court thus accepted the distinction the County emphasized throughout: Emissions are part of the causal chain explaining the County’s injury, not the wrongful conduct the County seeks to redress. The Court also held that the County’s alternative claims based on in-state emissions are expressly preserved from preemption.
The Court likewise found that the case presents no nonjusticiable political question and that, under Oregon’s separation of powers framework, resolving tort claims is a judicial function that does not require the Court to decide how the Legislature or executive branch should respond to climate change.
Court confirms jurisdiction over defendants in Oregon
The Court denied the defendants’ joint motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, concluding that the alleged deception campaign targeted Oregonians and increased fossil fuel sales in Oregon, and that litigating here does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
The Court also denied the individual jurisdictional motions of ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil Corporation, Koch Industries, and the American Petroleum Institute, based on each defendant’s alleged Oregon-directed conduct, including marketing and sales in Oregon, failures to warn Oregonians, and materials disseminated in the state.
The Court granted Valero Energy Corp.’s individual jurisdictional motion to dismiss without prejudice. The County’s claims against all other moving defendants proceed on all four causes of action.
Next steps
The case now proceeds in Multnomah County Circuit Court.