Family Wins Fracking Suit in Legal Blow to Industry
Attorney: "I’m really proud of the family that went through what they went through and said, ‘I’m not going to take it anymore.'"
In what is being called a legal blow to the fracking industry, on Tuesday a Texas family was awarded $3 million in the first ever verdict to be handed down over the negative health impacts of fracking.
Bob and Lisa Parr of Wise County sued Aruba Petroleum in 2011 for shale gas drilling operations which their lawyers said "fouled the family's 40-acre ranch property, their home and quality of life," by sickening both them and their daughter Emma, as well as their pets and livestock.
"They're vindicated," said Attorney David Matthews following the news of the verdict. "I'm really proud of the family that went through what they went through and said, 'I'm not going to take it anymore. It takes guts to say, 'I'm going to stand here and protect my family from an invasion of our right to enjoy our property.'"
Though not the first suit filed against an energy company for damages related to fracking, the vast majority of those ended in settlements with plaintiffs bound to restrictive gag orders.
The companies have had "an effective campaign of secrecy that protected them," according to Earthjustice managing attorney Deborah Goldberg. As Goldberg explained to ThinkProgress, in addition to the gag orders, the industry has historically dodged blame by claiming proprietary rights on the details of their operations.
"A lot of the earlier tort cases [against fracking companies] were dismissed because the industry was so successful at withholding information that people couldn't draw connections between the problems and what industry were doing," Goldberg added. "Now studies are starting to be done, and people are beginning to realize that they can document what the impacts are going to be."
Last week, three seperate studies were released documenting the toxic impact of fracking operations. Research conducted by the Physicians Scientists & Engineers for Healthy Energy, found that fracking likely produces public health risks and "elevated levels of toxic compounds in the environment" in nearly all stages of the process.
Months after fracking operations began in 2008, the Parrs began to experience negative health effects, including breathing difficulties, nausea, rashes and nosebleeds. Doctors confirmed the existence of hydrocarbon-related chemicals in Lisa's bloodstream and their young daughter was diagnosed with asthma.
Further, as ThinkProgress reports, the Parrs experienced the death of house pets and livestock, and saw "physical dwarfing" of a newborn calf.
The $3 million verdict was only about 4.5 percent of the $66 million the Parrs had sought in their latest complaint, according to the details of the suit. The jury rejected the family's claim that Aruba acted with malice. Reportedly, Aruba plans to appeal the verdict.
_____________________
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
In what is being called a legal blow to the fracking industry, on Tuesday a Texas family was awarded $3 million in the first ever verdict to be handed down over the negative health impacts of fracking.
Bob and Lisa Parr of Wise County sued Aruba Petroleum in 2011 for shale gas drilling operations which their lawyers said "fouled the family's 40-acre ranch property, their home and quality of life," by sickening both them and their daughter Emma, as well as their pets and livestock.
"They're vindicated," said Attorney David Matthews following the news of the verdict. "I'm really proud of the family that went through what they went through and said, 'I'm not going to take it anymore. It takes guts to say, 'I'm going to stand here and protect my family from an invasion of our right to enjoy our property.'"
Though not the first suit filed against an energy company for damages related to fracking, the vast majority of those ended in settlements with plaintiffs bound to restrictive gag orders.
The companies have had "an effective campaign of secrecy that protected them," according to Earthjustice managing attorney Deborah Goldberg. As Goldberg explained to ThinkProgress, in addition to the gag orders, the industry has historically dodged blame by claiming proprietary rights on the details of their operations.
"A lot of the earlier tort cases [against fracking companies] were dismissed because the industry was so successful at withholding information that people couldn't draw connections between the problems and what industry were doing," Goldberg added. "Now studies are starting to be done, and people are beginning to realize that they can document what the impacts are going to be."
Last week, three seperate studies were released documenting the toxic impact of fracking operations. Research conducted by the Physicians Scientists & Engineers for Healthy Energy, found that fracking likely produces public health risks and "elevated levels of toxic compounds in the environment" in nearly all stages of the process.
Months after fracking operations began in 2008, the Parrs began to experience negative health effects, including breathing difficulties, nausea, rashes and nosebleeds. Doctors confirmed the existence of hydrocarbon-related chemicals in Lisa's bloodstream and their young daughter was diagnosed with asthma.
Further, as ThinkProgress reports, the Parrs experienced the death of house pets and livestock, and saw "physical dwarfing" of a newborn calf.
The $3 million verdict was only about 4.5 percent of the $66 million the Parrs had sought in their latest complaint, according to the details of the suit. The jury rejected the family's claim that Aruba acted with malice. Reportedly, Aruba plans to appeal the verdict.
_____________________
In what is being called a legal blow to the fracking industry, on Tuesday a Texas family was awarded $3 million in the first ever verdict to be handed down over the negative health impacts of fracking.
Bob and Lisa Parr of Wise County sued Aruba Petroleum in 2011 for shale gas drilling operations which their lawyers said "fouled the family's 40-acre ranch property, their home and quality of life," by sickening both them and their daughter Emma, as well as their pets and livestock.
"They're vindicated," said Attorney David Matthews following the news of the verdict. "I'm really proud of the family that went through what they went through and said, 'I'm not going to take it anymore. It takes guts to say, 'I'm going to stand here and protect my family from an invasion of our right to enjoy our property.'"
Though not the first suit filed against an energy company for damages related to fracking, the vast majority of those ended in settlements with plaintiffs bound to restrictive gag orders.
The companies have had "an effective campaign of secrecy that protected them," according to Earthjustice managing attorney Deborah Goldberg. As Goldberg explained to ThinkProgress, in addition to the gag orders, the industry has historically dodged blame by claiming proprietary rights on the details of their operations.
"A lot of the earlier tort cases [against fracking companies] were dismissed because the industry was so successful at withholding information that people couldn't draw connections between the problems and what industry were doing," Goldberg added. "Now studies are starting to be done, and people are beginning to realize that they can document what the impacts are going to be."
Last week, three seperate studies were released documenting the toxic impact of fracking operations. Research conducted by the Physicians Scientists & Engineers for Healthy Energy, found that fracking likely produces public health risks and "elevated levels of toxic compounds in the environment" in nearly all stages of the process.
Months after fracking operations began in 2008, the Parrs began to experience negative health effects, including breathing difficulties, nausea, rashes and nosebleeds. Doctors confirmed the existence of hydrocarbon-related chemicals in Lisa's bloodstream and their young daughter was diagnosed with asthma.
Further, as ThinkProgress reports, the Parrs experienced the death of house pets and livestock, and saw "physical dwarfing" of a newborn calf.
The $3 million verdict was only about 4.5 percent of the $66 million the Parrs had sought in their latest complaint, according to the details of the suit. The jury rejected the family's claim that Aruba acted with malice. Reportedly, Aruba plans to appeal the verdict.
_____________________