2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120566
M.D. Pa.2010Background
- Plaintiffs are 63 residents of Dimock and Montrose, PA who leased land to Cabot and allege gas-well drilling caused methane, toxins, and groundwater contamination.
- Plaintiffs assert eight counts: HSCA, negligence, private nuisance, strict liability, breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, medical monitoring trust funds, and gross negligence.
- Defendants move to strike several allegations and move to dismiss Counts I, IV, VII, and VIII; both motions were filed June 1, 2010 and fully briefed.
- Court applies Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard and Rule 12(f) strike standards to evaluate the Second Amended Complaint.
- Court declines to dismiss Counts I (HSCA), IV (strict liability), and VII (medical monitoring) at this stage, and dismisses Count VIII (gross negligence) as separate claim but allows related allegations for punitive damages.
- Court denies the strike of most challenged allegations and addresses negligence per se as a non-impertinent theory in the complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| HSCA claim viability | Plaintiffs allege Section 702/507/1101 response costs; no notice required for 702. | HSCA requires notice and DEP prosecution status; 1115(b) may bar suit. | Count I survives the motion to dismiss. |
| Strict liability for gas-well drilling | PA follows Restatement 519/520; drilling may be abnormally dangerous. | PA has not decided; cases extend/not extend strict liability to drilling. | Count IV survives for now; record undeveloped; no summary judgment. |
| Medical monitoring claim viability | PA recognizes medical monitoring when exposure and risk exist; allegations show exposure to hazardous substances. | Medical monitoring claim requires more than conclusory allegations. | Count VII survives the motion to dismiss. |
| Gross negligence as a standalone claim | Claim abandoned but underlying allegations relevant to punitive damages. | Gross negligence not recognized under PA law as separate claim. | Count VIII dismissed as a separate cause of action; associated allegations may support punitive damages. |
Key Cases Cited
- Two Rivers Terminal, L.P. v. Chevron USA, Inc., 96 F. Supp. 2d 426 (M.D. Pa. 2000) (distinguishes HSCA notice requirements for §1115 claims vs. §702/507 claims)
- Redland Soccer Club, Inc. v. Dept. of the Army, 548 Pa. 178 (Pa. 1997) (seven elements for medical monitoring; expert testimony required)