Archive

ShareThis Page
Mt. Pleasant couple sue Consol over gas royalties | TribLIVE.com
News

Mt. Pleasant couple sue Consol over gas royalties

A Westmoreland County couple has filed a lawsuit against Consol Energy Inc. for underpayment of natural gas royalties.

Earl D. Hall Sr.; his wife, Betty Jane; and son Earl Hall Jr. of Mt. Pleasant filed the lawsuit in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court on Nov. 19.

Ten people filed a similar lawsuit last week in federal court against Energy Corp. of America. The lawsuits are seeking class-action status, which could encompass more than 1,000 plaintiffs in the Consol lawsuit and more than 100 in the Energy Corp. case.

In both lawsuits, the plaintiffs said they entered into separate lease agreements with the companies under which they would receive royalties based on the amount of gas collected each month from their land.

The companies are accused of breaching the leases by taking “volumetric deductions” and calculating royalties using a price that was less than the price paid to the companies, according to the lawsuits filed by William Caroselli.

Consol and Energy Corp. could not be reached for comment.

Caroselli contends the companies could be forced to pay millions of dollars to the class.

“The companies are not paying what they should be paying,” Caroselli said.

The 13-page lawsuit against Consol alleges breach of contract and improper accounting. The Halls leased oil and gas rights to Dominion Exploration & Production Inc. for property in Fayette County. Consol acquired Dominion’s rights to the lease this year, according to the lawsuit.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.