Mealey's Fracking : Mealey's : Legal News & Analysis

Mealey's Fracking

June 21, 2023
Energy Company: It Would Be ‘Clear Error’ To Let Mineral Rights Ruling Stand

COLUMBUS, Ohio — An energy company has filed a reply brief in Ohio federal court arguing that it should reconsider a ruling that dismissed many of the company’s claims in a complex mineral rights dispute because it would be “clear error” to let the ruling stand in light of the court’s analysis of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
June 12, 2023
Parties’ Letters To Court Debate Nature Of Case About Fracking Railway Line

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Surface Transportation Board (STB) has sent a letter to the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals contending that an environmental advocacy group has engaged in “mischaracterizations” in its response to another letter sent to the D.C. Circuit by intervenors in litigation pertaining to a proposed rail line in Utah that would carry, among other things, products related to hydraulic fracturing to and from the shale formation in the Uinta Basin. The STB contends that the final destination of the products remains general rather than specific.
June 09, 2023
Companies Say Fracking Patent Expert’s Opinions Are ‘Unsupported And Unsound’

MIDLAND, Texas — Fuel distribution companies that are defendants in a hydraulic fracturing patent dispute moved in Texas federal court to exclude certain opinions of the plaintiff’s expert on grounds they are “unsupported and unsound” theories of infringement.
June 09, 2023
Groups Seek Agencies’ Records Explaining Failure To Hold Fracking Lease Sales

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Fracking trade groups have filed a reply brief in Wyoming federal court arguing that it should grant declaratory relief and direct the parties to proceed directly to the remedies phase of consolidated litigation the groups and Wyoming have brought against the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) for its failure to conduct mineral lease sales for hydraulic fracturing in the third and fourth quarters of 2022.
June 08, 2023
Magistrate Judge Says Fracking Fraud Case Barred By Statute Of Limitations

PITTSBURGH — A federal magistrate judge in Pennsylvania on June 7 ruled that a case brought by an energy company against a law firm and its representatives for fraud related to the purchase of oil and gas assets in the Marcellus Shale formation was barred by the statute of limitations because the energy company waited too long to file the case.
June 08, 2023
Ohio High Court To Hear Fracking Dispute Over Definition Of ‘Utica Shale’

COLUMBUS, Ohio — A divided Ohio Supreme Court will hear a case on the common meaning of the language in a hydraulic fracturing lease that is the subject of a dispute between fracking operators and a mineral rights owner pertaining to the definition of what constitutes the “formation commonly known as the Utica Shale.” The rights owner contends that the companies drilled beyond the shale formation in violation of the lease agreement.
June 07, 2023
Judge Says Pipeline Company Fails To Show Injunction Is Warranted In Permit Case

HARRISBURG, Pa. — A federal judge in Pennsylvania denied a pipeline company’s motion for an injunction to prevent environmental advocates from appealing permits required for a gas pipeline expansion project, ruling that the company failed to show that the “extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction is warranted in this case.”
June 07, 2023
Fracking Operator: Energy Company’s Bid To Reconsider Mineral Rights Ruling Fails

COLUMBUS, Ohio — A hydraulic fracturing operator has filed a brief in Ohio federal court opposing an energy company’s motion to reconsider a previous ruling that dismissed many of that company’s claims in a complex mineral rights dispute. The fracking operator contends that the court has already rejected the arguments for reconsideration and that based on recent developments in the case, the issue of reconsideration is moot.
June 06, 2023
Biden Administration, Tribes: Court Should Deny Objections To Intervention Ruling

SALT LAKE CITY — The Biden administration and Native American tribes on June 5 filed a brief in Utah federal court contending that it should deny objections by groups that were denied the right to intervene in a lawsuit pertaining to the administration’s decision to reinstate the dimensions of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments because the potential intervenors “inaccurately claim” that in issuing the ruling the judge adopted a “novel” approach to intervention.
June 06, 2023
Texas High Court Will Hear Fracking Dispute Over Fairness Of Pooling Offer

AUSTIN, Texas — The Texas Supreme Court will hear Ammonite Oil & Gas Corp.’s case against the Texas Railroad Commission (RRC) for the RRC’s denial of Ammonite’s request for forced pooling of oil and gas resources with EOG Resources. Ammonite contends that the RRC wrongly determined that Ammonite’s voluntary pooling offer to EOG was not “fair and reasonable.”
June 05, 2023
U.S. High Court Will Not Hear Trade Group’s Petition Related To Offshore Fracking

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 5 refused to hear a hydraulic fracturing trade group’s petition in which it had argued that a federal appellate panel “drastically expanded the meaning of ‘final agency action’” under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when it ruled that federal agencies violated the law when they approved drilling in the Pacific Outer Continental Shelf off the coast of California.
June 02, 2023
U.S. Chamber: NEPA Does Not Require Additional Analysis Of Federal Fracking Leases

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce permission to file an amicus curiae brief in a hydraulic fracturing lease dispute, and a proposed version of the brief that the U.S. Chamber filed with its motion for leave argues that the “rule of reason” in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) does not require the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to conduct the additional analysis on greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) that environmental groups demand.
June 01, 2023
3rd Circuit Says Faulty Workmanship Is Not Occurrence, No Coverage Owed To Insured

PHILADELPHIA — The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeal on May 31 reversed a district court’s ruling that an insurer must indemnify its insured for damages to natural gas wells caused by the insured’s fracking work because neither faulty workmanship nor failure to perform a contract in a workmanlike manner can be construed as an occurrence under the policy at issue.
June 01, 2023
Panel Vacates Ruling In Fracking Case, Says Dispute Belongs At Pipeline Commission

HARRISBURG, Pa. — A state appeals panel in Pennsylvania vacated a trial court’s dismissal of a pipeline dispute brought by residents contending that a pipeline to carry hydraulically fractured oil and gas through residential areas and remanded the matter with instruction that the plaintiffs’ unfair trade practices claims should be stayed and the remaining causes of action should be transferred to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC).
May 19, 2023
Briefly: Panel Says Expert Reports Not Privileged In Pipeline Explosion Case

HARRISBURG, Pa. — A Pennsylvania appellate court panel ruled that a hydraulic fracturing pipeline company’s expert reports are not privileged and therefore are discoverable in litigation brought by a midstream services company that is suing the pipeline company for breach of contract in relation to an explosion that damaged the pipeline and other property.
May 19, 2023
Alaska Seeks Intervention In Offshore Fracking Lease Dispute

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Alaska filed a reply brief in federal court arguing that it should be permitted to intervene in a lawsuit brought by environmental groups challenging the U.S. Department of the Interior’s (DOI) decision to hold a lease sale for offshore hydraulic fracturing in Cook Inlet.
May 19, 2023
Briefly: Pipeline Company Failed To Meet Safety Standards, Panel Says

HARRISBURG, Pa. — A Pennsylvania appellate panel ruled that the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) did not err in finding a hydraulic fracturing pipeline company’s public awareness program for safety failed to meet the reasonable service standard required.
May 19, 2023
Panel Reverses, Remands Lease Dispute, Says Pipeline Company Owns Mineral Rights

HOUSTON — A Texas appellate court panel granted a motion for rehearing in an oil and gas lease dispute and remanded the matter to the trial court, ruling that a pipeline company owns the remaining royalty under a long-disputed mineral lease contract.
May 17, 2023
Operators Say Supreme Court Must Hear Offshore Fracking Dispute Under Federal Law

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The American Petroleum Institute (API) and its affiliates on May 16 filed a reply brief in the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that it should hear their case pertaining to alleged violations of federal law with regard to offshore hydraulic fracturing because a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision “drastically expanded the meaning of ‘final agency action’” under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
May 05, 2023
Judge Says Fracking Operators Failed To Meet Standard Of Care In Injury Lawsuit

HARRISBURG, Pa. — A federal judge in Pennsylvania has denied a motion to dismiss a hydraulic fracturing injury case, ruling that “a reasonable factfinder” could find that the fracking operators’ conduct “constituted an extreme departure from the standard of care.” The judge also said that questions remained regarding the application of “gross negligence” in the master service agreement between the operators and a third-party contractor and, therefore, the case could not be dismissed.
May 05, 2023
Alaska: Case Challenging Fracking In Petroleum Reserve Fails For Lack Of Injury

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The state of Alaska has filed a brief in Alaska federal court arguing that a lawsuit brought by an environmental group challenging the adequacy of an environmental impact statement for planning hydraulic fracturing activities in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A) should be dismissed because the group has not suffered any injury.
May 04, 2023
Leaseholders Say Company Deprived Them Of Fracking Proceeds With ‘Willful Intent’

OKLAHOMA CITY — Leaseholders have filed a lawsuit in Oklahoma federal court seeking declaratory judgment and damages against an oil and gas exploration company, contending that it failed to pay revenues and that it did so “with actual, knowing and willful intent to deprive” the leaseholders of their proceeds.
May 03, 2023
Groups Say Summary Judgment Proper In Alaska Fracking Case Due To NEPA Violation

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The Sierra Club and other environmental groups moved for an Alaska federal court to take judicial notice of supplemental factual materials they say support their motion for summary judgment, in which they say the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) violated federal law when it approved oil and gas exploration activities known as Peregrine Program in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.
May 03, 2023
Government Says Fracking Lease Sale ‘Far From Arbitrary,’ Federal Laws Were Honored

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Federal defendants filed a cross-motion for summary judgment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia arguing that their decisions regarding the sale of oil and gas lease parcels for hydraulic fracturing complied with federal regulations and standards, therefore they are entitled to summary judgment on claims brought by groups alleging that the environmental analysis accompanying the sale was not sufficient.
May 03, 2023
Groups Insist Supreme Court Review Of Offshore Fracking Ruling Is Not Needed

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Environmental Defense Center (EDC) and other environmental groups filed an opposition brief in the U.S. Supreme Court contending that it does not need to review a petition filed by the American Petroleum Institute (API) and its affiliates pertaining to alleged violations of federal law with regard to offshore hydraulic fracturing because the court below properly applied the Supreme Court’s two-part test for evaluating when an agency action is final pursuant to Bennett v. Spear and because the decision does not have “far-reaching practical or legal implications.”