A Gregg County jury Thursday sided with two companies that said activities at the Rabbit Creek ATV-RV Park were endangering pipelines and rights of way running through the park near Kilgore.
The decision clears the way for County Court at Law Judge Alfonso Charles to hold a hearing to consider granting a request from Eastman Chemical Co.-Texas Operations and Enbridge Pipelines (East Texas) for a permanent injunction to stop vehicles at the park from riding the length of the pipelines rights of way. Charles said the hearing likely will be held in the next week.
Representatives of the two companies testified earlier this week that vehicles traveling up and the down the rights of way were leaving deep ruts, which could expose the pipelines and lead to a fire, explosion, injuries or deaths. The pipelines carry natural gas, propylene, methane and other materials.
The rights of way cover about 10 acres of the 650-acre park. Riders must cross the rights of way to get to some areas of the park. A temporary injunction that's already in effect allows them to do that in designated places.
"This does not shut the park down," Oscar Still, who owns the park on leased land, said after Thursday's verdict was announced.
Eastman and Enbridge also want Still to pay for repairing the rights of way, including putting more dirt on top and planting grass.
The decision by the seven-woman, five-man jury followed three days of testimony that focused largely on photos presented by both sides.
Eastman and Enbridge presented photos that included ruts in the ground above the pipeline and all-terrain vehicle riders traveling the rights of way despite the temporary injunction.
Still's side showed photos of what he said were ruts left by Eastman's and Enbridge's mowing tractors.
The jury deliberated for about 1 1/2 hours before unanimously ruling that Still and his business have and continue to pose a threat to Eastman's and Enbridge's pipelines and that negligence damaged Eastman and Enbridge. The jury also determined that Eastman should receive $30,000 and Enbridge should receive $10,000 for damages. Charles will decide whether to award those monetary damages.
"We think it was a wise decision that will allow us to take the additional necessary legal steps to protect our pipelines," said Brian Bunt, the attorney representing Eastman and Enbridge.
Still said he would consider appealing. "We feel like it opens the door for pipeline companies to go after other landowners and to put the burden of maintenance of pipeline rights of way on landowners of Texas rather than on the pipeline companies themselves," Still said.
Bunt said his clients don't face similar problems in other parts of the state.
In closing arguments Thursday, Bunt said Eastman and Enbridge were in court because they "want to be good corporate neighbors" and want to be responsible to Gregg County residents.
Still's attorney, David Fugler, said it was the companies' responsibility to maintain the pipelines. He said they filed a lawsuit instead of building a fence to protect the rights of way so that Still would have to pay for that work.
Bunt said the companies didn't have the authority to go on the property and put up a fence wherever they want.
Friday May 19th, 2006
By Jo Lee Ferguson
Article Reference: http://www.news-journal.com/news/con...06Eastman.html
The decision clears the way for County Court at Law Judge Alfonso Charles to hold a hearing to consider granting a request from Eastman Chemical Co.-Texas Operations and Enbridge Pipelines (East Texas) for a permanent injunction to stop vehicles at the park from riding the length of the pipelines rights of way. Charles said the hearing likely will be held in the next week.
Representatives of the two companies testified earlier this week that vehicles traveling up and the down the rights of way were leaving deep ruts, which could expose the pipelines and lead to a fire, explosion, injuries or deaths. The pipelines carry natural gas, propylene, methane and other materials.
The rights of way cover about 10 acres of the 650-acre park. Riders must cross the rights of way to get to some areas of the park. A temporary injunction that's already in effect allows them to do that in designated places.
"This does not shut the park down," Oscar Still, who owns the park on leased land, said after Thursday's verdict was announced.
Eastman and Enbridge also want Still to pay for repairing the rights of way, including putting more dirt on top and planting grass.
The decision by the seven-woman, five-man jury followed three days of testimony that focused largely on photos presented by both sides.
Eastman and Enbridge presented photos that included ruts in the ground above the pipeline and all-terrain vehicle riders traveling the rights of way despite the temporary injunction.
Still's side showed photos of what he said were ruts left by Eastman's and Enbridge's mowing tractors.
The jury deliberated for about 1 1/2 hours before unanimously ruling that Still and his business have and continue to pose a threat to Eastman's and Enbridge's pipelines and that negligence damaged Eastman and Enbridge. The jury also determined that Eastman should receive $30,000 and Enbridge should receive $10,000 for damages. Charles will decide whether to award those monetary damages.
"We think it was a wise decision that will allow us to take the additional necessary legal steps to protect our pipelines," said Brian Bunt, the attorney representing Eastman and Enbridge.
Still said he would consider appealing. "We feel like it opens the door for pipeline companies to go after other landowners and to put the burden of maintenance of pipeline rights of way on landowners of Texas rather than on the pipeline companies themselves," Still said.
Bunt said his clients don't face similar problems in other parts of the state.
In closing arguments Thursday, Bunt said Eastman and Enbridge were in court because they "want to be good corporate neighbors" and want to be responsible to Gregg County residents.
Still's attorney, David Fugler, said it was the companies' responsibility to maintain the pipelines. He said they filed a lawsuit instead of building a fence to protect the rights of way so that Still would have to pay for that work.
Bunt said the companies didn't have the authority to go on the property and put up a fence wherever they want.
Friday May 19th, 2006
By Jo Lee Ferguson
Article Reference: http://www.news-journal.com/news/con...06Eastman.html


















