Litigation

Energy Companies | Energy Services | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | MarkWest Energy | Pennsylvania | Pipelines | Range Resources Corp | Washington County

MarkWest Wins Court Case to Build Compressor Station in Cecil, PA
October 2, 2014October 2, 2014

Cecil Township in Washington County, PA is one of the original seven selfish townships that sued and eventually had portions of the state’s Act 13 Marcellus drilling law overturned. The portion overturned restored to local municipalities the right to establish their own zoning regulations when it comes to oil and gas related activities. Apparently Cecil thought they had a blank check to deny anything they wanted, but a recent court decision has brought them back to reality. A Commonwealth Court judge has ruled Cecil must and will allow MarkWest to build a compressor station in an area clearly zoned for it under Cecil’s own rules–a station they’ve been trying to build since 2010…
Read More “MarkWest Wins Court Case to Build Compressor Station in Cecil, PA”
Beck Energy | Belmont County | Energy Companies | Industrywide Issues | Lease & Royalty Payments | Litigation | Monroe County | Ohio | XTO

Major OH Court Victory for Beck Energy & XTO in Lease Case
October 1, 2014October 3, 2014

A court case with big implications for all Ohio landowners–and drillers–was decided in March 2013. In Hupp v. Beck Energy Corp, three landowners filed suit claiming that their leases with Beck Energy Corp. were void and should be terminated because Beck never drilled wells on their property and that a provision allowing Beck to pay a nominal delay fee was against public policy. The court agreed and granted summary judgment (see OH Lawsuit Victory: 600-700 Landowners Can Terminate Beck, XTO Leases). Beck had sold the leases–in Monroe and Belmont counties–to XTO Energy, so XTO got involved in the lawsuit too. The court then granted class certification to the lawsuit brought by the three landowners–meaning between 600-700 landowners would also be able to invalidate their leases. A few weeks later both Beck and XTO filed an appeal (see XTO, Beck Energy Appeal OH Case Allowing Lease Termination). On appeal, this week the Seventh District Court of Appeals in Ohio overturned the lower court ruling and ruled in favor of Beck and XTO–a major victory for Ohio’s drillers and a major defeat for the landowners who say their land never got drilled and they wanted to re-sign with different company…
Read More “Major OH Court Victory for Beck Energy & XTO in Lease Case”
Industrywide Issues | Lease & Royalty Payments | Litigation | Ohio | Statewide OH

OH 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision on Dormant Minerals Act
October 1, 2014October 2, 2014

A few weeks ago MDN told you about the important court case before the Ohio Supreme Court concerning the 1989 and 2006 Ohio Dormant Minerals Act (see Video: OH Lawyers Explain Dormant Minerals Act & Impact on Utica). While the OH Supremes have not yet ruled, there was a ruling on the periphery of the DMA from the Seventh District Court of Appeals concerning the 1989 version of the DMA a few days after our post…
Read More “OH 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision on Dormant Minerals Act”
Energy Companies | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | Pennsylvania | Range Resources Corp | Regulation | Washington County | Wastewater

Did DEP Mishandle Range Wastewater Impoundment Investigation?
September 29, 2014September 29, 2014

Range Resources has had a long-running dispute with some of the neighbors near some of it’s wastewater impoundments in Washington, PA. Without recounting the details (see MDN’s previous stories here), the entire thing came to a head recently when the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) completed their investigation and fined Range the highest amount any driller has paid so far in the modern shale drilling era (see PA DEP Fines Range Resources $4.15M for Wastewater Impoundments). Part of the deal is that Range is closing those impoundments. There are, of course, legal actions involved, as you might expect. One of the neighbors near the Yeager impoundment sued Range with claims of well water contamination from chemicals leaking from the impoundment. The DEP determined the landowner’s well was not contaminated by the Range impoundment and the landowner challenged that finding in DEP’s version of court, the Environmental Hearing Board. Testimony at the hearing last week from a DEP official about the investigation indicates the DEP “might have used incomplete and inaccurate test information to decide whether chemicals leaking…contaminated a water well and springs”…
Read More “Did DEP Mishandle Range Wastewater Impoundment Investigation?”
Energy Companies | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | PDC Energy

PDC Energy Settles Lawsuit with Previous Investors for $35M
September 22, 2014September 22, 2014

There’s a fair amount of high finance when it comes to how drilling companies are structured on paper. There are, in some cases, corporations, partnerships, and then there’s the Master Limited Partnership (MLP), a special form of company allowed under United States law to encourage the mineral and extractive industries. At the end of the day, they’re businesses, no matter that form of legal structure they take. However, the legal structure of partnerships is used to encourage investors to invest large sums of money. And when those partnerships are bought out, the investors want their due proceeds. Sometimes there’s a dispute, as happened to PDC Energy (formerly known as Petroleum Development Corporation). PDC had several layers of partnerships that they rolled up into one company back in 2010/2011. The partners in the sub-units purchased felt that they didn’t get their fair share, so they sued. On Friday PDC announced they had settled and over the next 13 years they’ll pay out money to the tune of $35 million…
Read More “PDC Energy Settles Lawsuit with Previous Investors for $35M”
Industrywide Issues | Lease & Royalty Payments | Litigation | Ohio | Statewide OH

Video: OH Lawyers Explain Dormant Minerals Act & Impact on Utica
September 19, 2014September 19, 2014

An issue MDN has not previously tackled (until now) that is coming to the fore in Ohio is “the Dormant Minerals Right Act” (DMA) in that state. In a nutshell, there are two DMAs in Ohio–one passed in 1989 that went into effect in 1992, and another in 2006 which added certain additional procedural requirements to the 1989 version. The DMA in its various versions provides for mineral rights that had previously been separated from surface rights to transfer to the surface owner under certain conditions. The problem–for drillers and for landowners in Ohio–is in knowing which set of DMA rules to use (1989 or 2006) in determining who owns the mineral rights. It’s a big problem when drillers are spending sometimes up to $10,000-$12,000 per acre in lease bonuses–to say nothing of where to send the royalty check. Some drillers are holding back on leasing because of this issue. A case now sits with the Ohio Supreme Court, Walker v Noon, that will sort out these important issues. The very sharp lawyers at Ohio law firm Bricker & Eckler have done a masterful job of explaining the case before the Supreme Court, a case brought by their firm…
Read More “Video: OH Lawyers Explain Dormant Minerals Act & Impact on Utica”
Chesapeake Energy | Energy Companies | Industrywide Issues | Lease & Royalty Payments | Litigation

Mich. AG Continues to Target Chesapeake, Racketeering Charge
September 17, 2014September 17, 2014

In June 2012 Reuters tried to stir up trouble against Chesapeake Energy by broadcasting “leaked” (Watergate anyone?) emails that somehow magically appeared on the Reuters doorstep that supposedly show Chesapeake trying to collude with Encana Energy to keep the price of Michigan state land oil and gas leases artificially low (see Did Reuters Break the Law with Latest Chesapeake Story?). Eventually the Michigan Attorney General’s office filed charges against Chesapeake, even though the federal government had investigated and didn’t find anything worth pursuing (see Feds Clear Chesapeake & Encana in Collusion Case, Michigan Next?). Michigan is still hell-bent on shaking down Chesapeake (see Michigan AG (Unbelievably) Files More Charges Against Chesapeake). The same Michigan Attorney General, Bill Schuette, has also filed charges against Chesapeake’s leasing arrangements with private landowners. On Monday, a Michigan court said Chessy must face a trial on one charge of racketeering (a felony) and 20 counts of using false pretenses to allegedly defraud private landowners in the state…
Read More “Mich. AG Continues to Target Chesapeake, Racketeering Charge”
Energy Companies | Hydraulic Fracturing | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | New York | Norse Energy | Regulation | Statewide NY | Tompkins County

Norse Energy Appeals Town Ban Case Back to NY High Court
September 16, 2014September 16, 2014

In April MDN reported on the rumors that Norse Energy, the ill-fated company that bet big on New York State with 180,000 acres of leased land in NY, had been sold at bankruptcy court (see Highest Bid for Norse Energy $2.65M – Was it Sold & Who Bid?). As we pointed out in the story, we don’t know if the company was actually sold, and if it was, who the actual buyer was. We still don’t know. What we do know is that the only thing left to sell were Norse’s leases, since they had already sold off all of the hard assets (see Lights Turned Off, Door Closed – Good Night, Norse Energy). However, the Norse trustee retained at least some of the leases assets so the company could continue their lawsuit against New York for bankrupting them. Try to get back at least some of that money. Then the double-whammy: The New York Court of Appeals (our highest court) ruled against Norse and said local towns can ban fracking (see Shale Drilling in NY is Over – High Court Upholds Town Bans). The new news, just coming to light for us, is that Norse appealed that decision back to the Court of Appeals for a second time, based on a recent decision in a Colorado court…
Read More “Norse Energy Appeals Town Ban Case Back to NY High Court”
Industrywide Issues | Litigation | Pennsylvania | Warren County | Wastewater

CWA v Waste Treatment Corp Wastewater Discharge Lawsuit Settled
September 12, 2014September 12, 2014

In October of last year MDN told you the radical national anti-drilling organization Clean Water Action (CWA) had sued a small Pennsylvania company by the name of Waste Treatment Corporation (WTC) in Warren, PA in federal court claiming the company continued to accept, treat and discharge Marcellus drilling wastewater into the Allegheny River (see CWA Sues/Accuses Waste Treatment Corp of Continued Shale Pollution). WTC was supposed to have stopped that practice two years earlier, in 2011, after then-Secretary of the Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP), Michael Krancer, got all such operations to cease and desist. Responses to the CWA lawsuit from both the WTC and the DEP raised more questions than they answered for us (see Waste Treatment, PA DEP Respond to CWA Lawsuit). Since last year, the lawsuit has been quiet–at least publicly. Yesterday CWA announced they’ve reached a settlement of the case with WTC agreeing to immediately stop accepting/discharging Marcellus wastewater (even though they say they don’t), install expensive new equipment over the next 8 months, and then restart accepting Marcellus wastewater processing again…
Read More “CWA v Waste Treatment Corp Wastewater Discharge Lawsuit Settled”
Anti-Drilling/Fossil Fuel | Hydraulic Fracturing | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | Lycoming County | Pennsylvania | Regulation

Philly Inquirer Exposes PennFuture Lies in Lycoming County Case
September 5, 2014September 5, 2014

Yesterday MDN brought you the news that the virulently anti-drilling PennFuture was crowing about another scalp their lawyers have claimed in preventing fracking in Lycoming County, PA (see Bad PA Supreme Court Act 13 Decision Comes Home to Roost). We’ve often told you about the lying propaganda pumped out by PennFuture. Our words certainly don’t bother them. But we bet the words of none other than the Philadelphia Inquirer do bother them. The Inquirer is also out with a story about the challenge by PennFuture and a couple of ninny nanny “neighbors” (more than 2/3 of a mile away) who abused the recent Supreme Court decision to force the town to not allow the drilling it wants to allow. The Inquirer skewers PennFuture, pointing out the lies they tell…
Read More “Philly Inquirer Exposes PennFuture Lies in Lycoming County Case”
Energy Companies | Industrywide Issues | Inflection Energy | Litigation | Lycoming County | Pennsylvania | Regulation

Bad PA Supreme Court Act 13 Decision Comes Home to Roost
September 4, 2014September 25, 2019

The anti-drilling spin machine is in full cycle from the virulent anti-drilling group PennFuture. They’re hoping you won’t notice what we’re about to point out: the rank hypocrisy of a court decision last Friday. PennFuture is out with a press release that’s all peaches and cream, butterflies and unicorns that a (low) county court in Lycoming County has tossed out a drilling permit reviewed and allowed by Fairfield Township against Inflection Energy and landowners Donald and Eleanor Shaheen. PennFuture is billing it as the first test of the PA Supreme Court’s decision to allow local towns to create their own oil and gas zoning ordinances (see PA Supreme Court Rules Against State/Drillers in Act 13 Case). “But, wait a minute!” (you may say), “The Supreme Court said towns can do as they please, right?” Right. “The town decided the well pad was OK, so what’s the deal?” Good question…
Read More “Bad PA Supreme Court Act 13 Decision Comes Home to Roost”
Hydraulic Fracturing | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | Pennsylvania | Regulation | Statewide PA

PA PUC Appeals Act 13 Case to Supreme Court One More Time
August 29, 2014August 29, 2014

It seems there’s still a bit of unfinished business with the ongoing, never-ending lawsuits around the Act 13 oil and gas drilling law in Pennsylvania. At least one final bit of unfinished business. You will recall that seven selfish towns sued the state over the Act 13 law and it’s provision that would substitute a statewide, uniform and fair set of zoning ordinances for drilling in place of a patchwork, crazy quilt system of local ordinances for oil and gas drilling. These seven selfish towns wanted their own ordinances and sued, ultimately winning at the Supreme Court (see PA Supreme Court Rules Against State/Drillers in Act 13 Case). The PA Supremes couldn’t, however, be bothered with deciding every tiny bit of nuance and sent some items back to the lower Commonwealth Court for final decisions. One of those decisions was about whether or not the PA Public Utility Commission (PUC) has the right to review any local oil and gas ordinances for compliance with state standards, making the award of impact fee money to a town based on such compliance. The Commonwealth Court gutted that right, taking it away from the PUC in a July decision (see PA Court Says 7 Towns Can Keep Marcellus Money & Ban Drilling Too). The PUC has appealed that decision back up to the Supremes…
Read More “PA PUC Appeals Act 13 Case to Supreme Court One More Time”
Energy Companies | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | Pennsylvania | Range Resources Corp | Washington County | Wastewater

Range Resources to Begin Closing Yeager Impoundment on Monday
August 15, 2014August 15, 2014

As we promised two weeks ago, we have more news and developments on Range Resources’ Yeager Wastewater Impoundment in Amwell Township (Washington County), PA. Range will begin the process of decommissioning the impoundment (i.e. pond) starting Monday, August 18th. As they do so, a lawyer for the three families suing Range with charges of well water contamination will be at the site to take their own so-called “independent” soil samples, right alongside Range. What Range (and the lawyer) will be looking for is any evidence that the two rubber liners have, in the past, leaked wastewater and therefore salts or chlorides, into the ground. Below we have a brief backgrounder, a copy of the Range 98-page plan to close the Yeager impoundment, and the recommended tweaks to that plan by the state DEP…
Read More “Range Resources to Begin Closing Yeager Impoundment on Monday”
Energy Companies | Hydraulic Fracturing | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | Pennsylvania | Range Resources Corp | Regulation | Washington County

Robinson Twp, PA Offers a Preview into Future of NY Frack Debate
August 8, 2014August 8, 2014

One of the original seven selfish townships in Pennsylvania that sued the state over the Act 13 Marcellus Drilling law because of its zoning provisions–and won–has just become less selfish. In fact, the town, Robinson Township in Washington County, PA, has done a complete reversal. Two of the three anti-drilling supervisors were voted out of office last November. On their way out they tried to pull a fast one by passing super restrictive zoning (in December). Last night, the incoming two supervisors who are pro-drilling repealed the law and passed one of their own that’s favorable to the drilling industry. Below we take a look at Robinson’s complete reversal, which offers a fascinating preview into what’s coming to townships across New York State when Gov. Andrew “man child” Cuomo finally decides to make a decision to allow fracking…
Read More “Robinson Twp, PA Offers a Preview into Future of NY Frack Debate”
Energy Services | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | NGLs | Pennsylvania | Pipelines | Regulation | Statewide PA | Sunoco Logistics

Sunoco Logistics Update on Mariner East Pipeline
August 8, 2014August 8, 2014

On Wednesday midstream company Sunoco Logistics released their second quarter 2014 update. There’s essentially no discussion or reference to the Mariner East pipeline, which is currently bogged down in litigation and regulation (see Setback for Mariner East NGL Pipe – Judges Say Not Public Utility). However, in the follow up and ubiquitous analyst call that usually accompanies the release of these updates, Sunoco’s top management had quite a bit to say about Mariner East 1 and 2, as well as other projects in the Marcellus/Utica…
Read More “Sunoco Logistics Update on Mariner East Pipeline”
Energy Services | Industrywide Issues | Litigation | Pennsylvania | Pipelines | Processing Plants | Regulation | Statewide PA | Sunoco Logistics

Setback for Mariner East NGL Pipe – Judges Say Not Public Utility
July 31, 2014July 31, 2014

Two “independent” administrative law judges for the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission have dealt what could be a major blow to Sunoco Logistics’ request to have the Mariner East NGL (natural gas liquids) pipeline declared a public utility. The two judges–David Salapa and Elizabeth Barnes–handed down a decision yesterday that denies Sunoco’s request to have 18 pump and 17 value stations (in 31 locations) that would need to be built along the 300+ mile pipeline exempt from local zoning ordinances. If the pipeline is considered a public utility it would be exempt from local ordinances. Without that exemption, Sunoco Logistics faces a nearly impossible task of trying to gain permission to build the necessary new stations. Below is a copy of the decision, and MDN’s background on this important pipeline project, along with a “where do we go from here” analysis…
Read More “Setback for Mariner East NGL Pipe – Judges Say Not Public Utility”