<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Frack Check WV &#187; legal settlement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frackcheckwv.net/tag/legal-settlement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2024 22:41:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Marginalized Landowners on the Losing End of Lawsuits</title>
		<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2013/12/04/10266/</link>
		<comments>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2013/12/04/10266/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 12:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Duane Nichols</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[land disturbances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawsuits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal settlement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soil disturbances]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frackcheckwv.net/?p=10266</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lawsuit denied appeal Chesapeake sued over drilling waste From the Article by David Beard, Morgantown Dominion Post, December 2, 2013 A Wetzel County couple lost their appeal of a Marcellus gas well case in federal court. Dewey and Gay Teel sued Chesapeake Appalachia for common law trespass regarding drill cuttings pits on their property. In [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><div>
<div id="attachment_10303" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 300px">
	<a href="/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/rough-roads-ahead.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-10303" title="rough-roads-ahead" src="/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/rough-roads-ahead-300x300.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="300" /></a>
	<p class="wp-caption-text">Rough roads ahead for landowners</p>
</div>
</div>
<div><strong>Lawsuit denied appeal</strong></div>
<div><strong>Chesapeake sued over drilling waste</strong></div>
<div><strong><br />
</strong></div>
<p><a href="http://www.dominionpost.com/">From the Article</a> by David Beard, Morgantown Dominion Post, December 2, 2013</p>
<p>A Wetzel County couple lost their appeal of a Marcellus gas well case in federal court.</p>
<p>Dewey and Gay Teel sued Chesapeake Appalachia for common law trespass regarding drill cuttings pits on their property.</p>
<p>In October, a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the decision in Chesapeake’s favor previously issued by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia. The mandate making the judgment effective was issued this month.</p>
<p>According to the original complaint, the Teels own 104 acres on Blake Ridge. The mineral rights were severed in 1959. In 2009, during gas well operations, Chesapeake created and left pits containing drilling mud, drill cuttings and chemicals. The pits had their liners removed and were covered. At other drilling sites, Chesapeake hauled such waste to landfills, rather than leaving it on the property.</p>
<p>In its mid-October opinion, the panel noted that this case was essentially identical to that of another Wetzel couple, Martin and Lisa Whiteman. The Whitemans lost their appeal in the same court in September.</p>
<p>The panel said trespass exists if a party’s entry onto another’s land, or leaving something upon the land, is without lawful authority. In the case of a severed estate, where the mineral owner has the right to enter and burden the surface to do what is reasonably necessary to exploit the minerals, the burden falls to the surface owner to show lack of reasonable necessity.</p>
<p>The court determined that neither the Whitemans nor the Teels demonstrated that.</p>
<p>Among other things, they failed to show that Chesapeake’s closed-loop system, which was being tried in other states at the time of the Teel work, was the norm in West Virginia at the time. In fact, Chesapeake was still using open disposal pits in West Virginia. “The Teels have also failed to muster evidence plausibly suggesting that Chesapeake’s operations impose a substantial burden on their property.”</p>
<p>The opinion is considered “unpublished” and does not set a binding precedent in the 4th Circuit. The panel echoes a point highlighted in the Whiteman case: That analyzing reasonable necessity is fact specific, and “what is necessary is a fluid concept that must be determined on a case-by-case basis.”</p>
<p>Following on the heels of the Whiteman case, this one resolved itself more quickly. The Whiteman appeal case ran from June 2012 through September. The Teel case ran from November 2012 to early this month.</p>
<p>The Dominion Post <span style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;">reached Teel attorney Joseph Lovett on Wednesday, but he wasn’t free to speak, and asked to call him back Friday. He did not reply to calls or an email sent Friday. Co-counsel Isak Howell did not respond to a voice mail. Chesapeake declined to comment.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;">&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;</span></p>
<p><strong>Judge dismisses most of Preston gas lease lawsuit</strong></p>
<p>From an  <a href="http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201312020013">article</a> at the WV Gazette on December 2, 2013</p>
<p>MORGANTOWN,  W.Va. &#8212; More than half of the counts and more than a dozen defendants  in a West Virginia oil and gas lease lawsuit have been dismissed.</p>
<p>The  lawsuit combines 68 cases filed by 121 mineral owners in Preston County  who allege that Traverse City, Mich.-based Magnum Land Services and  Belmont Resources LLC fraudulently persuaded them to sign gas leases  below their true value.</p>
<p>Defendants also include Canada-based  Enerplus Resources and 19 employees of Magnum and Belmont. The lawsuit  said the leases were transferred in 2010 to Enerplus. The company was  excluded from two counts associated with notarizing the leases.</p>
<p>The companies have denied the allegations.</p>
<p>U.S.  District Judge Irene Keeley dismissed the 19 employees from the  lawsuit, saying in two separate orders that they weren&#8217;t served papers  in a timely manner, The Dominion Post reported Monday.</p>
<p>Keeley also  dismissed five of the lawsuit&#8217;s nine counts, including slander of  title, one fraud count, leases void because of disqualifying interest,  misconduct of notary public against Magnum and Belmont, and tort of  outrage, which means inducing the plaintiffs to sign lowball leases was  unconscionable.</p>
<p>Part of a conspiracy count relating to the  employees also was dismissed. A portion of the count alleging conspiracy  between Magnum and Belmont was retained.</p>
<p>The other remaining  counts include fraud in the inducement of the leases, unconscionability  relative to plaintiffs&#8217; inadequacy in bargaining power, and declaratory  relief to nullify and renegotiate the leases.</p>
<p>The case originally  was filed in Preston County Circuit Court in November 2012 and was  transferred to federal court in February. The residents are demanding  unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.</p>
<p>A trial is set for Oct. 27, 2014.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2013/12/04/10266/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>XTO Settlement Avoids Possible Precedent</title>
		<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2013/12/03/xto-settlement-avoids-possible-precedent/</link>
		<comments>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2013/12/03/xto-settlement-avoids-possible-precedent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 12:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Duane Nichols</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal settlement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Surface Owners Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frackcheckwv.net/?p=10271</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gas-drilling case settled XTO offer taken after 2-year suit From the Article by David Beard, Morgantown Dominion Post, November 29, 2013 A Marion County landowner’s federal lawsuit to throw a gas-drilling company off his land has been settled out of court. Richard Cain sued XTO Energy — an Exxon subsidiary — about horizontal gas wells [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p><strong>Gas-drilling case settled</strong></p>
<p><strong>XTO offer taken after 2-year suit</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.dominionpost.com/">From the Article</a> by David Beard, Morgantown Dominion Post, November 29, 2013</p>
<p>A Marion County landowner’s federal lawsuit to throw a gas-drilling company off his land has been settled out of court.</p>
<p>Richard Cain sued XTO Energy — an Exxon subsidiary — about horizontal gas wells on his land that also drain gas from neighboring tracts. Cain said XTO had no right to use his only drawing gas from neighboring mineral tracts.</p>
<p>Cain’s complaint said XTO planned for a total of three well pads with 18 horizontal gas wells. Those wells would drain the minerals under him and up to 3,000 acres of mineral tracts around him. But all the surface burdens would be his.</p>
<p>“I got involved in this case,” McMahon said in a release issued after The Dominion Post called his office, “to try to set a precedent in the West Virginia Supreme Court. Mr. Cain really wanted to protect not only this piece of recreational property, but also other properties, including his home property and the properties of others in the state, where the drillers were headed next.”</p>
<p>But the case, begun in June 2011, dragged on too long, McMahon said. Cain suffered some financial difficulties, “and the company finally made him an offer he was not in a position to turn down. We appreciate that he hung in as long as he did.”</p>
<p>McMahon said that settlement papers haven’t been signed and he wasn’t at liberty to discuss possible future activity on the Cain property at this time.</p>
<p>XTO referred questions to its parent, Exxon, which did not respond to a request for comment.</p>
<p>McMahon said in the release, “Our position is that the law is clear. A driller has no right to put a pipeline across your land from a well above, and producing gas from, a neighboring mineral tract. If there is no right to disturb your land for just a pipeline, then there certainly is no right to use your land to put one of these enormous, long lasting, property devaluing, and potentially dangerous Marcellus well pads on you with multiple horizontal wells that produce gas from neighboring mineral tracts. They have less need for your surface for horizontal drilling because they can drill to the minerals under you from a mile away.”</p>
<p>McMahon said SORO is again looking for the right test case to take to the state Supreme Court.</p>
<p>“We think the law is clear based on legal treatises and cases on coal mining, but there is no West Virginia Supreme Court case on this issue for horizontal gas we l l s, ” he said. “As a result, the companies get away with having their landmen tell surface owners that the company has a right to put these awful well pads on them, and maybe offering them what the land is worth to the surface owner, but not what the location is worth to the driller.</p>
<p>“Most people’s life savings are tied up in their home and land,” he said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2013/12/03/xto-settlement-avoids-possible-precedent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chesapeake Energy Settles Water Well Lawsuit in Bradford Co. PA for $1.6 M</title>
		<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2012/06/24/chesapeake-energy-settles-water-well-lawsuit-in-bradford-co-pa-for-1-6-m/</link>
		<comments>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2012/06/24/chesapeake-energy-settles-water-well-lawsuit-in-bradford-co-pa-for-1-6-m/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jun 2012 15:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Duane Nichols</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bradford County]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chesapeake Energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contamination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drilling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fracking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal settlement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marcellus shale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pipe casing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[water wells]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frackcheckwv.net/?p=5323</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wyalusing, Bradford Co. PA Kevin Begos writing for the Associated Press, as reported in the Philadelphia Inquirer on June 23rd, describes an open legal settlement in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, involving three families who experienced contaminated water wells as a result of Marcellus drilling by Chesapeake Energy. Jared McMicken of Wyalusing said the agreement reached Thursday [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><div class="mceTemp">
<dl id="attachment_5324" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 221px;">
<dt class="wp-caption-dt"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Wyalusing-PA.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-5324" title="Wyalusing PA" src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Wyalusing-PA.jpg" alt="" width="211" height="211" /></a></dt>
<dd class="wp-caption-dd">Wyalusing, Bradford Co. PA</dd>
</dl>
<p>Kevin Begos writing for the Associated Press, <a title="Associated Press story on water wells in Wyalusing, PA" href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/state/20120622_ap_16msettlementinpagasdrillinglawsuit.html" target="_blank">as reported</a> in the Philadelphia Inquirer on June 23<sup>rd</sup>, describes an open legal settlement in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, involving three families who experienced contaminated water wells as a result of Marcellus drilling by Chesapeake Energy.</p>
<p>Jared McMicken of Wyalusing said the agreement reached Thursday provides little comfort since his drinking water was ruined by nearby drilling, and his family must move. &#8220;We&#8217;ve lost our house, and we&#8217;re not going to get out of it what we got into it,&#8221; he said. &#8220;We have a bunch of people who have to leave their homes.&#8221;</p>
<p>McMicken said he and the other families in the case insisted that any settlement be made public. The families settled for $1.6 million. The families will have to give Chesapeake the properties by the end of 2012.</p>
<p>The arbitration trial began this week and was settled on the fourth day. Attorney Todd O&#8217;Malley said he believes this is the first case involving pollution in the Marcellus Shale region where settlement terms were publicly disclosed. Past disputes have been sealed.</p>
<p>Chesapeake said in a statement that it believes there is no permanent damage to the properties and that other water wells in the area showed natural contamination before drilling began. McMicken disputed that, saying his water and that of his neighbors was fine before the drilling. &#8220;They screwed up all the wells on this mountain. Anybody that lives in this area, are going to pay the price over time,&#8221; McMicken said. Attorney John Romano said he&#8217;s representing about 30 other families in the region with similar claims.</p>
<p>Last year the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection fined Chesapeake just over $1 million for contaminating the water supplies of 16 families in the area, including McMicken&#8217;s. A transcript of expert testimony in the settlement showed that experts from DEP agreed that faulty cement casings on the wells allowed gas and other substances to migrate from deep underground and pollute the water wells.</p>
<p>&#8220;While Chesapeake remains confident that the water supply is consistent with area water quality standards, it has entered into the settlement so the families and the company could bring closure to the matter,&#8221; the company said.</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2012/06/24/chesapeake-energy-settles-water-well-lawsuit-in-bradford-co-pa-for-1-6-m/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
