Chance v. BP Chemicals, Inc.
Supreme Court of Ohio
670 N.E.2d 985 (1996)
- Written by Anjali Bhat, JD
Facts
Rose M. Chance, Eliza Avery, and Bessie Shadwick (plaintiffs) brought suit against BP Chemicals, Inc. (BP) (defendant) arguing that BP’s disposal of hazardous waste byproducts through the use of deepwell injection technology violated the plaintiffs’ rights as property owners because of the migration of the byproducts into the subsurface rock underlying the plaintiffs’ property. BP’s disposal of byproducts complied with applicable regulations. The parties contested the location of the injection and the likely extent of the migration. The trial court directed a verdict for BP on the plaintiffs’ claims of ultrahazardous activity, fraud, and nuisance, and sent the plaintiffs’ claim of trespass to the jury. The jury returned a verdict on the trespass claim in favor of BP. The plaintiffs appealed first to the court of appeals and then to the Supreme Court of Ohio. The plaintiffs argued they had absolute ownership of all the rock and water underlying the surface of their real properties and need not prove damages to obtain a verdict in their favor on the trespass claim.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Resnick, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
