Chance v. Bp Chemicals, Inc.

670 N.E.2d 985 (1996)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The Ohio General Assembly had set up a scheme for the granting of permits for and the supervision of injection wells by state agencies. D's operation of its wells is authorized by permits issued by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Even so the Code does not abridge rights of action or remedies in equity or under the common law, nor does such chapter, or any act done under such chapter, estop the state, or any municipal corporation or person, as riparian owners or otherwise, in the exercise of their rights in equity or under the common law to suppress nuisances or to abate pollution. Ps sued D for D's disposal of hazardous waste byproducts by deep well injection. Ps claims for ultrahazardous activity, fraud, punitive damages, emotional distress, and nuisance were dismissed. All that remained was a trespass claim. The jury gave the verdict to D. The court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court of Ohio granted certiorari. Ps put forth the theory that they have absolute ownership of all the subsurface property and need not prove damages on their trespass claim. Ps claim that while this court has recognized some limitations on absolute ownership of air rights by surface property owners, no such limitation exists on ownership of subsurface property rights by surface owners.