In In re Deepwater Horizon, 744 F.3d 370 (5th Cir. 2014) (No. 13-30315), BP entered into a settlement with a class of businesses that experienced economic loss as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  As part of the settlement, class members could submit claims for economic loss.  BP opposed certain claims and argued that valid claims required proof of actual economic loss caused by the oil spill.  Otherwise, according to BP, the class members would lack standing to sue and the case would not present a case or controversy under Article III. The district court rejected BP’s argument, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed.  The court agreed that for there to be a case or controversy, plaintiffs must demonstrate an injury resulting from the wrong.  In this case, however, the parties had agreed that the proof of injury could be satisfied by the attestation of claimants pursuant to the settlement agreement.  BP had agreed to accept a claimant’s attestation, rather than require additional proof of causation.