Ely v. Cabot Oil & Gas Corp.

38 F.Supp.3d 518 (2014)

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

Ds have moved for summary judgment on Ps' claims that natural gas drilling operations and hydraulic fracturing (fracking), constitute abnormally dangerous activities. Kenneth Ely granted an Oil and Gas Lease to D. Kenneth Ely died and his son, Nolen Scott Ely, was appointed as executor of the Estate. The Estate (P) has brought a claim against Ds for alleged 'ground contamination' caused by operations at well sites located on the Estate Property. P has not made any claim for water contamination on the Estate Property caused by hydraulic fracturing or other drilling operations. Nolen Scott Ely also entered into an Oil and Gas Lease with D. Ds have not conducted drilling operations on or under the Ely Property, but Ps allege that their water supply is within 1000 feet of natural gas wells owned and operated by D. P's expert has stated that Ps water supply has been affected by D's drilling operations in the area and that the water supply continues to detect levels of chemicals caused by Cabot natural gas drilling activity. Consumption of the water 'poses a threat to human health and Ps should not be subjected to drinking such water.' Ps claim they have experienced headaches, upset stomachs, and rashes beginning around this time. Ps have not produced evidence to show how ds drilling operations allegedly affected their water supply, and they have not provided medical expert testimony to support their claim that their alleged medical symptoms were related to constituents in their water supply. Ps have offered limited evidence to help substantiate their claims. Ps have presented an expert report that simply describes possible negligence and opines that fluid migration from the wells, to the extent it occurred, was 'likely' due to a lack of due care relating to 'faulty well design and/or construction.' Ps have not submitted evidence showing that the risks associated with natural gas drilling cannot be eliminated with the exercise of due care, and Ps have not provided expert testimony to support their claim that the drilling operation of hydraulic fracturing has either affected Ps' water or property. The record contains a surplus of evidence not only attesting to the relative safety of natural gas drilling operations.