Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 105: Listen and Learn -- Public and Private Nuisance
Bill on Bankruptcy: The Market's Unquenchable Thirst for Junk
As we enter 2023, we reflect on 2022 as another dynamic year in the renewables and clean energy market. The Renewables and Clean Energy team at BCLP has undertaken a review of judicial decisions reported in 2022 involving the...more
A United States District Court (W.D. New York) (“Court”) addressed in a July 14th decision and order (“Order”) an issue arising out of the operation of wind turbines. See Andre, et al. v. Invenergy LLC, 2022 WL 2759249. ...more
On September 9th, the City of Charleston filed a complaint against a number of oil companies in state court alleging nuisance, trespass, and unfair trade practices related to the companies’ marketing of petroleum products....more
The Tenth Circuit has recently joined its sister circuits, the Fourth Circuit and Ninth Circuit, in finding that federal courts do not have subject-matter jurisdiction over state-law nuisance claims. A Colorado climate-change...more
WV Supreme Court Mulls Marcellus Shale Mass Litigation Case from Harrison, WV - "While the case centers on Harrison County, where the surface owners live and the Marcellus Shale operations are underway, the case could have...more
Another day, another loss for governments suing oil and gas producers based on the effects of climate change. Yesterday, the Southern District of New York dismissed a nuisance action filed by New York City against five of...more
Yesterday, a California federal court dismissed Oakland’s climate change lawsuit against five of the world’s largest oil and gas producers, holding that Oakland failed to state an actionable claim for public nuisance. The...more
Last week, Boulder made good on its threat to file a lawsuit seeking potentially billions of dollars from energy producers based on the effects of climate change. The city and county of Boulder, along with San Miguel...more
When must a neighbor sue for nuisance and trespass or else be barred by limitations? It’s a tricky question. In Town of Dish et al v. Atmos Energy et al, the Texas Supreme Court concluded that the claims were time-barred. The...more
It was a bad day for the Parrs in Aruba Petroleum v. Parr. The trial court judgment was against the operator for intentional nuisance. The Parrs recovered $2.9 million for pain and suffering and mental anguish and for loss of...more
On December 2, 2016, the Texas Supreme Court denied review in Cerny v. Marathon Oil Corp., leaving in place the decision of the Fourth Court of Appeals, affirming summary judgment for the defendants and finding that the...more
A recent decision in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, Terra Walker et al. v. Kingfisher Wind, LLC, No. 5:14-cv-914-D, Doc. 160 (W.D. Okla. Oct. 13, 2016), could sound a death knell for nuisance...more
Gardiner v. Crosstex North Texas Pipeline LLC, has brought clarity to Texas nuisance law. It took the Texas Supreme Court 54 pages; we have it in under 600 words. ...more
Therapist: “We’re here today in group to bring closure to the traumatic events of Crosstex North Texas Pipeline L.P. v. Gardiner. Each side claims mistreatment by his adversary and by one component or another of the civil...more
Plaintiffs Bob and Lisa Parr obtained a $2.9 million verdict in April 2014 against Aruba Petroleum, Inc. for health problems allegedly related to oil and gas drilling operations and air emissions near their home. The large...more
On April 10, 2014, a Fort Worth jury rejected a landowner's nuisance claim against a well operator in Teri Anglim v. Chesapeake Operating Inc., 2011-008256-1. Plaintiff Teri Anglim claimed that Chesapeake's operations at two...more
As we know, the Parrs won a $2.9 million jury verdict against Aruba Petroleum for a nuisance created by gas wells near the Parrs’ home in Wise County, Texas. Let’s see what claims didn’t make their way to the jury. ...more