UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

SCOTT CARSWELL, JULIE CARSWELL,

KENT McCOY, JANINE McCOY, and ROBERT

HOWARD, individually and as representatives of

similarly situated persons,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO.:4:10-cv-00486- SPM-WCS

vs.

LISA ECHEVERRI, as Executive Director of the

Florida Department of Revenue, acting in her

official capacity, and BP, plc; BP PRODUCTS

NORTH AMERICA, INC.; BP AMERICA,

INC.; BP EXPLORATION AND

PRODUCTION, INC.; BP AMERICAN

PRODUCTION COMPANY; TRANSOCEAN,

LTD; TRANSOCEAN OFFSHORE

DEEPWATER DRILLING, INC.;

TRANSOCEAN DEEPWATER,

INC.;TRANSOCEAN HOLDINGS, LLC;

TRITON ASSET LEASING GMBH;

HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC.;

CAMERON INTERNATIONAL

CORPORATION f/k/a COOPER CAMERON

CORPORATION; ANDARKO PETROLEUM

CORPORATION; ANDARKO E&P

COMPANY, L.P.; MOEX OFFSHORE 2007,

LLC; M-I, LLC; DRIL-QUIP, INC.; MITSUI

OIL EXPLORATION; and HYUNDAI HEAVY

INDUSTRIES CO., LTD., INC.,

Defendants.

Defendant Florida Department of Revenue’s Response to 

The Second Amended Notice of Joinder in Motions to Stay 

Defendant, the Florida Department of Revenue, hereby responds to the December 3, 2010 

Second Amended Notice of Joinder in Motions to Stay which included additional argument filed 

by Defendant, Cameron International Corporation.

Case 4:10-cv-00486-SPM -WCS Document 41 Filed 12/10/10 Page 1 of 5
2

On November 16, 2010 the BP Defendants filed an Unopposed Motion for Stay of 

Proceedings (Unopposed Motion for Stay) (Dkt. no. 16) and Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. 

("HESI") filed a Joinder in BP Defendants’ Motion for Stay of the Proceedings (Dkt. no. 17). 

On November 22, 2010 the BP Defendants filed an Amended Rule 7.1(B) Conference Statement

Regarding Unopposed Motion for Stay of Proceedings (Dkt. no. 20) and stated that Plaintiffs 

opposed their request for a stay. The Florida Department of Revenue, as a Defendant does not 

join in or agree with the BP Defendants’ Unopposed Motion for Stay, and was also not consulted 

by the BP Defendants before they filed their Unopposed Motion for Stay. Defendant Cameron 

International Corporation (Cameron) in its Notice of Joinder (Dkt. no. 32) simply did not just file 

a joinder but also included additional argument. The purpose of this pleading is to respond to the 

additional arguments raised by Cameron.

1. This case is before this Court on the issue of whether there is “federal question” 

jurisdiction of a first amended complaint filed in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, 

Leon County, Florida (Second Judicial Circuit), pursuant to Chapter 86, Florida Statutes. See

Transocean’s Amended Notice of Removal (Dkt no. 10) filed on November 10, 2010. In this 

state tax law case, Plaintiffs seek an injunction prohibiting the Florida Department of Revenue 

and the State Court System from exercising their respective statutorily granted authority 

involving the valuation and assessment of real property for ad valorem property tax purposes in 

Florida. See Florida Department of Revenue’s Motion to Dismiss and in the Alternative Remand

(Motion to Dismiss and/or Remand) (Dkt. no. 26).

2. This case in the first instance mainly involves the valuation of property by local 

Florida county property appraisers for ad valorem tax purposes. Because there is no federal issue 

whatsoever presented on the face of the first amended complaint and the lack of jurisdiction of 

Case 4:10-cv-00486-SPM -WCS Document 41 Filed 12/10/10 Page 2 of 5
3

this Court over state tax law matters, the traditional rules governing removal dictate against such 

removal to this Court and favor dismissing or remanding back to the Second Judicial Circuit. 

3. Nothing presented by Cameron in its additional argument should distract or dissuade 

this Court from ruling upon the Florida Department of Revenue’s Motion to Dismiss and/or 

Remand in an expedited manner as set forth in its Motion to Expedite the Consideration of the 

Defendant Florida Department of Revenue’s Motion to Dismiss and in the Alternative Remand 

(“Motion to Expedite”) (Dkt. no. 27) filed on November 30, 2010 and now pending before this 

Court. Cameron’s Notice of Joinder presents legal argument and authority that is inopposite to 

its request that this Court grant a stay of this proceeding.

4. In its Notice of Joinder, on pages 2-3, Cameron stated that this the case should be 

transferred to the MDL because “[i]ssues related to the scope and reach of the Outer Continental 

Shelf Lands Act, the Oil Pollution Act, and the Class Action Fairness Act are common to dozens 

of cases in the Multidistrict MDL Court. Absent a coordinated ruling, the likelihood of 

inconsistent rulings is extremely high.” 

5. Unlike the dozens of cases in MDL No. 2179, the issues in this case are not 

“common” to and do not relate to the “scope and reach” of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 

Act, the Oil Pollution Act and the Class Action Fairness Act. Cameron cites as authority for this 

proposition to an order of the MDL Court (Dkt. no. 377) entered on November 30, 2010

discussing and denying remand and transferring of three cases involving plaintiffs (Kritzer, M.P. 

Cheng, and Pappas Restaurant) who are not members of the Executive branch of any state. 

Additionally, the Florida Department of Revenue in this case is a Defendant, not a Plaintiff.

6. The MDL Court based its transfer of these cases because they presented “common 

questions of fact with actions in this litigation previously transferred to the Eastern District of 

Case 4:10-cv-00486-SPM -WCS Document 41 Filed 12/10/10 Page 3 of 5
4

Louisiana, and that transfer of these actions to the Eastern District of Louisiana for inclusion in 

MDL No. 2179 will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and 

efficient conduct of this litigation.” Notice of Joinder, Exhibit E, page 2. 

7. In this action, Plaintiffs seek declaratory relief with respect to pure questions of 

Florida law relating to the proper interpretation of ad valorem property tax law, whereas the 

underlying cases in MDL No. 2179 are primarily tort or contract suits and related statutory 

actions involving different and fact-intensive inquiries into issues of fault and damages relating 

to the Deepwater Horizon explosion, fire, sinking, and resulting oil spill. In this state tax law 

case, there are no “common questions of fact” relating to the Deepwater Horizon explosion and 

involving to the Florida Department of Revenue.

8. As the issues in this case are simple, straightforward and principally consist of state

tax law matters, there is no danger as Cameron argues that “[a]bsent a coordinated ruling, the 

likelihood of inconsistent rulings is extremely high.” Instead, the Florida Department of 

Revenue submits the potential disruption and harm to the property tax system in the state of 

Florida is real and any delay in the yearly process of valuation, assessment and collection of the 

taxes involved would adversely affect the budgetary process of school districts, special districts, 

water management districts, counties and municipalities.

WHEREFORE, for all of the foregoing reasons, the Florida Department of Revenue 

requests this Court to deny Cameron’s request for a stay of all further proceedings pending a 

final decision by the MDL Court and request that the Court expedite a ruling on the Florida 

Department of Revenue’s Motion to Dismiss and/or Remand prior to any action by the MDL 

Court.

Case 4:10-cv-00486-SPM -WCS Document 41 Filed 12/10/10 Page 4 of 5
5

Respectfully submitted,

BILL McCOLLUM 

ATTORNEY GENERAL

/s/ Jonathan A. Glogau________

Jonathan A. Glogau

Chief, Complex Litigation

Fla. Bar No. 371823

PL-01, The Capitol

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050

850-414-3300, ext. 4817

850-414-9650 (fax)

jon.glogau@myfloridalegal.com

Joseph C. Mellichamp, III

Chief, Revenue Litigation Bureau

Florida Bar No. 133249

Office of the Attorney General 

The Capitol, 

PL-01 Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050 

(850) 414-3300

(850) 410-2672 (fax)

Joe.Mellichamp@myfloridalegal.com

Counsel for Defendant Lisa Echeverri

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 10, 2010, the foregoing document was filed with the 

Clerk of Court via the CM/ECF system, causing it to be served on all counsel of record.

/s/ Jonathan A. Glogau

 Attorney

Case 4:10-cv-00486-SPM -WCS Document 41 Filed 12/10/10 Page 5 of 5