April 4, 2018
Pennsylvania Superior Court Overturns Rule of Capture for Unconventional Gas Wells
On April 2, 2018, the Pennsylvania Superior Court issued a decision in Briggs v. Southwestern Energy Production Company, No. 1351 MDA 2017, reversing a lower court judgment entered in favor of the defendant producer.

In reversing the lower court, the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that the long-established "Rule of Capture" principle did not apply to prohibit a trespass claim by an adjoining unleased landowner against a producer when that producer utilizes hydraulic fracturing for a horizontal well.
The Pennsylvania Superior Court drew a distinction between gas purportedly trapped within shale rock formations and released by fracturing operations and fugacious gas within an underground reservoir released by conventional vertical wells. In remanding the action back to the lower court, the Superior Court held that questions of fact existed concerning the length of subterranean cracks created by hydraulic fracturing, and whether the cracks extended across property lines and released trapped shale gas from the adjoining landowner's tract.

This case should be closely watched because it could dramatically impact the Pennsylvania legal landscape for horizontal drilling. In addition, note the Briggs decision refers to Stone v. Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC, No. 5:12-CV-102, 2013 WL 2097397 (N.D. W.Va. Apr. 10, 2013), in which the federal District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia found that the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia might determine that hydraulic fracturing associated with horizontal drilling that penetrates adjoining land without the adjoining landowner's consent is not protected by the traditional Rule of Capture. However, the District Court later vacated its ruling based on a settlement between the affected parties.
For more information, please contact:



This is an attorney advertisement. Your receipt and/ or use of this material does not constitute or create an attorney-client relationship between you and Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC or any attorney associated with the firm. This e-mail publication is distributed with the understanding that the author, publisher and distributor are not rendering legal or other professional advice on specific facts or matters and, accordingly, assume no liability whatsoever in connection with its use.

Responsible Attorney: Michael J. Basile, 800-967-8251
Spilman Thomas & Battle, 300 Kanawha Blvd., E., Charleston, WV 25301
Sent by news@spilmanlaw.com in collaboration with
Constant Contact