Appeals Court Agrees with Newspapers in the Hollowich v. Range Resources Sealed Fracking Case

Appeals Court Agrees with Newspapers in Sealed Fracking Case by Susan Phillips, December 7, 2012, State Impact Pennsylvania
A Pennsylvania appeals court has ruled in favor of two newspapers seeking to unseal court records in a fracking contamination case. Hallowich v. Range Resources is one of the most closely watched cases involving claims of health impacts and property damage against a Marcellus Shale gas driller. But when the case was settled, the Court of Common Pleas sealed all the records. Reporters from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had been barred by court employees from observing a hearing that had been held several days before it was listed on the public docket. The paper’s publisher sued, and was later joined by another daily newspaper, the Observer-Reporter. In a ruling issued Friday, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania says the lower trial court erred in not considering the motion to unseal court records. The trial court had dismissed the newspaper’s motion because it was filed after the case was closed. The Superior Court ordered the Court of Common Pleas to take a look at the newspaper’s requests to unseal the record, and rule based on the merits of the case. [Emphasis added]

Judges rule fracking secrecy court case must be heard by Steve Mocarsky, December 7, 2012, Times-Leader
HARRISBURG – A panel of appeals court judges ruled today that a court case over gas industry secrecy must be heard by a trial court, despite objections from the gas industry. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Observer-Reporter are seeking to intervene to overturn a court order sealing the record in a case in which a Pennsylvania family sued several gas companies over property damage and health impacts related to air and water pollution from nearby natural gas operations. The gas companies are fighting to keep the records out of the public eye. As a result of today’s ruling, the newspapers will have the opportunity to present their argument to the trial court that the record should be unsealed so that the public can access information regarding this case. “We’re glad that the court ruled against industry’s attempt to block this case from proceeding. As long as the gas industry continues to hide chemical information, fight journalists seeking the truth, and silence families to prevent them from speaking out, it will never gain the public’s trust – and rightly so,” said Earthjustice attorney Matthew Gerhart. “Instead of obstructing access to information, gas companies should be disclosing the information necessary to understand the health impacts of fracking,” Gerhart said.

The newspapers seek to unseal a settlement agreement between homeowner (plaintiffs) and fracking companies (defendants). The parties of the underlying matter are plaintiffs Chris and Stephanie Hollowich, husband and wife, and defendants Range Resources Corp., Williams Gas/Laurel Mountain Midstream, Markwest Energy Partners LP, Markwest Energy Group LLC. The judges note that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection was also named as a defendant in the suit that the Hallowiches filed but has not taken part in the litigation and they do not refer to DEP when referring the the “defendants.” Two Post-Gazette reporters showed up on the day of a settlement hearing involving the couple’s minor children in August 2011 and requested to attend, but that request was denied by the trial court. The companies filed a joint motion to seal the record, which they and theplaintiffs agreed to, and the trial court approved and filed an order to seal the record on the same day. On Sept. 6, the Post-Gazette filed a motion to intervene and unseal the record and a week later, the Observer-Reporter filed a petition to intervene and joined The Post-Gazette’s motion to unseal the record. The petitions invoked the Pennsylvania Constitution’s provision, “All courts shall be open,” and the U.S. Constitution First Amendment’s right of access to civil proceedings. The court denied the newspapers’ petitions on the grounds of timeliness. The newspapers argued that the settlement hearing was scheduled for Aug. 26, 2011, but the parties agreed to meet instead on Aug. 24, 2011, and the date was never changed on the docket. Therefore, although they filed a motion after the hearing was over, there was no way they could have filed prior to the case being closed because the trial court sealed the reord on the same day. The appeals judges agreed and ordered a hearing on unsealing the case record. The newspapers were joined in the case earlier this year by a group of doctors, scientists, researchers and advocates seeking access to information that they say could shed light on the health impacts of gas development, including the controversial process known as hydraulic fracturing or fracking. Represented by the nonprofit environmental law firm Earthjustice, the group — Philadelphia Physicians for Social Responsibility, Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers for Healthy Energy, Dr. Bernard D. Goldstein, Dr. Walter Tsou, Dr. Jerome A. Paulson, Dr. William Rom, Dr. Mehernosh P. Khan, Dr. Sandra Steingraber, Dr. Simona Perry, Dr. Robert Oswald, Dr. Michelle Bamberger, Kathryn Vennie, and Earthworks — filed an amicus brief in April supporting the newspapers. [Emphasis added]

[Refer also to: Hollowich family’s lawsuit claims gas driller lied about property value

Read the amicus brief

In Fracking Court Fight, Towns Get Legal Help From 20 Groups ]

This entry was posted in Case Related, Global Frac News, Other Legal. Bookmark the permalink.