News
A North Dakota jury awarded $667 million in damages to Energy Transfer, the company that runs the Dakota Access Pipeline, after finding Greenpeace liable in a high-stakes defamation case.
Environmental group Greenpeace was ordered Wednesday to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages to a Texas-based pipeline company for its role in protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline ...
Hosted on MSN3mon
Greenpeace ordered to pay Dakota Access Pipeline operator $667 million in case that could destroy the group - MSNA North Dakota jury awarded $667 million in damages to Energy Transfer, the company that runs the Dakota Access Pipeline, after finding Greenpeace liable in a high-stakes defamation case.
A North Dakota jury found Greenpeace liable Wednesday for more than US$660 million in damages over protests against Energy Transfer's Dakota Access Pipeline.
The company behind the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline is suing Greenpeace for at least $300 million for damages the oil pipeline company says it suffered from protests in 2016 and 2017.
Greenpeace must pay $660 million to Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners and subsidiary Dakota Access LLC for inciting illegal activities during anti-pipeline protests nearly a decade ago.
A jury in North Dakota has found Greenpeace owes hundreds of millions of dollars to Energy Transfer, the company that built the Dakota Access oil pipeline.
Energy Transfer filed the lawsuit in 2019, accusing Greenpeace of providing resources, including supplies, intel and training, to encourage Dakota Access Pipeline protesters to commit criminal ...
Greenpeace has been ordered to pay more than $660 million in damages to the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline after the environmental group was found to have defamed the company and its ...
The environmental group, battling a multimillion-dollar lawsuit over protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline, told the North Dakota Supreme Court it can’t get a fair trial.
The Dakota Access Pipeline was completed and has been transporting oil since June 2017. Greenpeace International said it shouldn't be named in the lawsuit because it is distinct from the two U.S ...
Some results have been hidden because they may be inaccessible to you
Show inaccessible results