Crosstex North Texas Pipeline, L.P. v. Andrew Gardiner and Shannon Gardiner
451 S.W.3d 150
Tex. App.2014Background
- Crosstex North Texas Pipeline built a compressor station across FM 1385 from the Gardiners’ rural acreage.
- Gardiners sued Crosstex for negligent nuisance and related claims, alleging noise and vibrations from the station damaged their use and enjoyment of the land.
- Trial court directed a verdict on negligence; a jury still found negligence nuisance and awarded about $2.04 million.
- Evidence spanned pre- and post-start-up periods, mitigation efforts, sound measurements, and ongoing complaints from the Gardiners and nearby landowners.
- The court reversed, remanded for a new trial and to allow an abnormal-and-out-of-place nuisance theory to be added as a basis for nuisance.
- The issue on remand centered on whether Crosstex negligently created a nuisance and whether the nuisance could be considered abnormal/out-of-place.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligence-based nuisance sufficiency | Gardiners contend Crosstex negligently created a nuisance. | Crosstex argues no duty or breach; mitigation made it non-negligent. | Legally sufficient evidence; factually insufficient evidence for nuisance finding. |
| Factual sufficiency of the nuisance finding | Gardiners rely on comprehensive trial testimony supporting nuisance. | Crosstex asserts the weight of evidence supports non-negligence. | Factual sufficiency found in favor of Crosstex; judgment reversed for new trial. |
| Trial amendment to add abnormal/out-of-place nuisance | Abnormal/out-of-place theory should be allowed; evidence supports it. | amendment would surprise and prejudice Crosstex. | Trial court abused its discretion; remand for new trial to allow the amendment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Central Ready Mix Concrete Co. v. Islas, 228 S.W.3d 649 (Tex. 2007) (legal sufficiency and factual sufficiency standards applied)
- Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629 (Tex. 1986) (factual-sufficiency review framework)
- Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1986) (standard for determining factual sufficiency; balancing of evidence)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standard for legal sufficiency and weighing evidence)
- Garza v. Alviar, 395 S.W.2d 821 (Tex. 1965) (guidance on standard of review in reviewing credibility and weight)