Multiple Federal Marcellus Shale cases decided in the month of May.

Federal Courts in Pennsylvania have decided six cases that relate to Marcellus Shale drilling during the month of May.

The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania filed opinions in five cases this month.

1.      Berish v. Southwestern Energy Production Co.

On May 3^rd the court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a Third Amended Complaint because the court was not convinced that the Plaintiffs' claims were clearly barred by Pennsylvania's two-year statute of limitations.

o   Click here to read the Berish Opinion

2.      Bidlack v. Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC, and

3.      Otis v. Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC

On May 11^th, in two nearly identical opinions, the court denied Plaintiffs' Motion for Relief from Pending Arbitration because Plaintiffs did not establish that the evidence was a “surprise” or “newly discovered evidence”.

o   Click here to read the Bidlack Opinion

o   Click here to read the Otis Opinion

4.      Shamblin v. Chesapeake Energy Corp.

On May 25^th the court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss because Oklahoma law applies to Yost & Son, since it is an Oklahoma corporation.

o   Click here to read the Shamblin Opinion

5.      Boyer v. First American Title Insurance Co.

On May 31^st the court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, finding that the only dispute was the amount of damages due.

o   Click here to read the Boyer Opinion

In addition, a  U.S. magistrate judge in The District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania filed an opinion in Mason v. Range Resources – Appalachia, LLC on May 9^th. The court recommended that the motion to dismiss Count I of the complaint be denied but the motion to strike Plaintiffs’ claims for attorney’s fees be granted.

o   Click here to read the Mason Opinion

Written by Joseph Negaard, Research Assistant
May 31, 2012