Briggs v. Southwestern Energy Production Co.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
224 A.3d 334 (2020)
- Written by Matthew Celestin, JD
Facts
Adam, Paula, Joshua, and Sarah Briggs (plaintiffs) owned an 11-acre tract of land in Pennsylvania located next to another tract that Southwestern Energy Production Company (Southwestern) (defendant) leased for extracting natural gas. Southwestern used a technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, by which it essentially pumped fluid into a well to break up the rock formations so they would release natural gas. Southwestern never physically entered the Briggses’ property, but its fracking created pressure differentials that caused gas to flow from the rock formations beneath the Briggses’ property to Southwestern’s property, where Southwestern would then extract it. In 2015, the Briggses sued Southwestern for trespass and conversion. The Briggses claimed that Southwestern’s fracking caused fractures that extended into the rock formations beneath the Briggses’ property and thus constituted a per se physical intrusion onto their property. Southwestern argued that because it extracted natural gas from its leased property exclusively, the Briggses’ claims were barred by the rule of capture, which protects mineral extractors from trespass liability provided they do not physically intrude onto another’s land. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment in Southwestern’s favor. The appellate court reversed, and Southwestern appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Saylor, C.J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Dougherty, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.