OKLAHOMA CITY - The federal judge presiding over a lawsuit brought by Oklahoma residents who contend that they were injured from exposure to radioactive waste from a chemical plant operated by Halliburton Energy Services Inc. (HESI) on March 3 denied the residents class certification (Mitchell L. McCormick v. Halliburton Energy Services Inc., No. 11-01272, W.D. Okla.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) on March 2 issued an order granting a request to discontinue arbitration proceedings between several energy firms and the Argentine Republic (LG&E Energy Corp., et al. v. The Argentine Republic, No. No. ARB/02/1, ICSID).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) on Feb. 19 filed a lawsuit in California federal court against the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and other federal land management organizations contending that they have violated federal law by approving permits for hydraulic fracturing operations off the California coast (Center for Biological Diversity v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, et al., No. 15-1189, C.D. Calif.).
BISMARCK, N.D. - The Energy and Natural Resources Committee in the North Dakota Senate was slated to conduct hearings on Feb. 19 regarding a proposed bill that would amend the state's code concerning flaring of hydraulic fracturing wells.
COLUMBUS, Ohio - A divided Ohio Supreme Court on Feb. 17 ruled 4-3 that local ordinances regulating the practice of hydraulic fracturing for the extraction of oil and gas violate the Ohio Constitution (State ex rel. Morrison v. Beck Energy Corp., No. 2015-Ohio-485, Ohio Sup.)
PITTSBURGH - A group of Pennsylvania landowners on Feb. 2 filed a brief opposing a motion by an oil and gas exploration company in Pennsylvania federal court, arguing that the company's motion to preclude testimony regarding the validity of the price paid for oil and gas rights should be denied on grounds that the evidence in question would establish that the company breached its contract (David F. Pollock v. Energy Corporation of America, No. 10-1553, W.D. Pa.).
MONTGOMERY, Ala. - An Alabama federal judge on Jan. 29 granted an insurer's motion to dismiss an insured's breach of contract and bad faith suit seeking coverage for missing inventory of 82,510 bottles of 5-Hour Energy drinks, finding that coverage is barred by the policy's inventory shortage exclusion (W. L. Petrey Wholesale Co., Inc. v. Great American Ins. Co., No. 2:14-CV-868-CSC, M.D. Ala., Northern Div.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10036).
TORONTO - A Canadian energy company on Jan. 28 announced that it has filed a petition to enforce a $118 million arbitration award that was issued in its favor and against the Kyrgyz Republic by a Russian arbitration court.
EDINBURGH, Scotland - Scotland's energy minister on Jan. 28 announced that there will be a nationwide moratorium on hydraulic fracturing pending further research into fracking's impact on public health, according to a press release on the government's website.
CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. - All of the injuries alleged in three underlying lawsuits arise out of a pre-workout energy supplement's failure to conform with an insured's statements and, therefore, coverage for the actions is barred by the policy's failure-to-conform exclusion, a New York federal judge ruled Jan. 23 (General Star Indemnity Co. v. Driven Sports Inc., No 14-3579, E.D. N.Y.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7966).
MOSCOW - A Russian energy company on Jan. 13 announced that it has entered a settlement agreement with a former director, which will resolve pending litigation and a dispute over a London arbitration award.
HARRISBURG, Pa. - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on Jan. 13 denied a motion filed by a group of plaintiffs seeking to dismiss without prejudice their groundwater contamination case against three energy companies, ruling that the plaintiffs failed to justify their request (Tammy Manning v. WPX Energy Appalachia LLC, No. 12-0646, M.D. Pa.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3641).
WILMINGTON, Del. - A bar date for prepetition claims, including future claims by unknown persons who have yet to manifest any sign of illness from exposure to asbestos, must be established in the Chapter 11 case of Energy Future Holdings Corp. (EFH) but may be extended later for cause shown, a Delaware federal bankruptcy judge held Jan. 7 (In re: Energy Future Holdings Corp., No. 14-10979, D. Del. Bkcy.; 2015 Bankr. LEXIS 27).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - An energy company being sued for allegedly contaminating groundwater as a result of its operation of a coal generating plant on Jan. 5 filed a brief arguing that the case should be dismissed because the lawsuit is "a misuse" of the citizen suit power contained in the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S. Code Section 1251, et seq. (Yadkin Riverkeeper, et al. v. Duke Energy Carolinas LLC, No. 14-00753, M.D. N.C.).
ALBANY, N.Y. - A New York appeals court on Dec. 31 reversed a board's decision to award a maintenance worker benefits, finding insufficient evidence to show that his respiratory issues were caused by occupational exposure to mold (Edward Connolly v. Covanta Energy Corp., et al., No. 518493, N.Y. Sup.; App. Div.; 3rd Dept.; 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8995).
VANCOUVER, British Columbia - An energy resource company on Dec. 19 announced that an English high court has refused to set aside an arbitration award that was issued in its favor by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) International Court of Arbitration.
OKLAHOMA CITY - Halliburton Energy Services Inc. (HESI) and a group of residents who sued the company alleging injury from exposure to radioactive waste on Dec. 9 filed a joint motion in Oklahoma federal court seeking a settlement conference (Mitchell L. McCormick v. Halliburton Energy Services Inc., No. 11-01272, W.D. Okla.).
COLUMBUS, Ohio - An energy company that is being sued by a landowner who is seeking a ruling that the lease she entered with the company to allow hydraulic fracturing on her land has terminated on Dec. 9 removed the case to Ohio federal court and filed its answer, contending that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted (Nikki Filicky v. American Energy - Utica LLC, No. 14-02550, S.D. Ohio).
TORONTO - A Canadian energy corporation on Dec. 2 announced that an international arbitration tribunal has issued an award against it in a dispute with an oil and gas fund.
HARRISBURG, Pa. - An environmental watchdog and a group of residents on Dec. 1 renewed their appeal of a decision by the Pennsylvania Department of the Environment (DEP) that granted a hydraulic fracturing permit to an energy company, arguing that the DEP failed to adhere to standards and comply with the requirements of the Pennsylvania Constitution (The Delaware Riverkeeper Network, et al. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al. [in re: XTO Energy Inc.], No. 2014-101, Pa. EHB).
HOUSTON - The federal judge in Texas presiding over a contract dispute between a hydraulic fracturing company and another company that provided technology services for the operation of the fracking business on Dec. 1 issued an order setting the deadline for discovery, mediation and eventual trial, if necessary (Southwestern Energy Production Co. v. Crawford Technical Services LLC, No. H-14-1742, S.D. Texas).
HOUSTON - An oil and gas exploration company on Nov. 25 filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against a hydraulic fracturing company, contending that it has breached its contract by not offering the exploration company an opportunity to purchase a proportionate share of oil and gas assets the exploration company says it is due under a contract with a previous company (Energy & Exploration Partners LLC v. New Gulf Resources LLC, No. 14-03375, S.D. Texas).
SCRANTON, Pa. - A Pennsylvania federal judge on Nov. 18 granted a second extension of discovery in a hydraulic fracturing lawsuit brought by a group of residents who contend that residential water wells were contaminated by hydraulic fracturing chemicals. The order constituted one paragraph and provided no explanation for the judge's decision (Susan Berish, et al. v. Southwestern Energy Production Co., et al., No. 10-1981, M.D. Pa.).