Quintain Development, LLC v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., 210 W. Va. 128

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia addressed whether a natural gas pipeline easement had to be relocated to permit surface coal mining and who was responsible for the relocation costs. The court held that the Vinson and Baach easements required relocation where the pipeline interfered with coal removal, but that Quintain, which benefited from the relocation, had to bear the cost. The court further held that the pipeline and the refusal to pay relocation costs did not constitute a private nuisance because the easement was not exceeded, and it dissolved the injunction as to the McCormick tract.

Holdings

1. The Vinson and Baach easements required CNR to relocate its pipeline to the extent it interfered with the removal of coal, even though the contemplated mining method was surface or mountain-top-removal mining that was not known locally when the easements were executed.
2. Quintain, rather than CNR, was required to bear the cost of relocating the pipeline on the Vinson and Baach tracts.
3. Actions or inactions by an easement owner that otherwise meet the legal definition of a nuisance do not constitute a nuisance as to the servient estate unless they exceed the scope of the easement.
4. CNR's refusal to relocate the pipeline on the McCormick tract did not constitute a nuisance because the condemnation easement contained no provision requiring relocation to facilitate coal mining.
5. Because the injunction was dissolved as to the McCormick tract, CNR was entitled to recover damages incurred in connection with that portion of the injunction and could recover qualifying attorney fees upon proof of the applicable requirements.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Vinson and Baach easements required CNR to relocate its pipeline when the pipeline interfered with coal removal using surface or mountain-top-removal mining methods.
2. Whether the easement language requiring payment of damages from maintaining, operating, and removing the pipeline required CNR to pay the cost of relocating the pipeline.
3. Whether CNR's pipeline or refusal to relocate it constituted a private nuisance despite the express easements.
4. Whether CNR was entitled to damages and attorney fees after dissolution of the injunction as to the McCormick tract.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded