In 2010, the Hallowich family of Washington County in western Pennsylvania began experiencing health effects from what they thought was pollution of their well water from a nearby fracking well. They took the driller, Range Resources, to court, but had trouble proving that the chemicals that had appeared in their water were from drilling because their water had not been tested before Range arrived. Range denied any fault. In 2011, though, Range offered to buy the Hallowich’s farm in exchange for the life-long silence of the whole family (including two kids, then 7 and 10). The case was settled without a jury trial, and the judge who heard the case allowed the settlement to be “sealed”, meaning no one was ever supposed to see it.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, through dogged reporting and legal action, was able to get another judge to release the material in 2013, and that is the basis for this blog post. (That judge’s well-written opinion is here.)
What does this have to do with the Dragonpipe (Mariner East pipeline system)? We are seeing the same kind of gag orders in our area, in cases where Sunoco has been unwilling to let lawsuits go to trial. The five homes threatened by sinkholes on Lisa Drive in Exton were purchased under gag-order settlements, and we’ll probably never see what those owners had to agree to. There have been dozens of other “payments for silence” to complainants in our area. In the Hallowell case, we get a glimpse of what some of these families have had to agree to.
It is worth noting that Range Resources is also the primary source of the highly volatile compressed gases that flow through Mariner East 1.
In the transcript that follows, Chris and Stephanie Hallowich are appearing before Judge Paul Pozonsky to confirm that they will accept Range’s buyout offer. They are desperate to get their family away from their polluted farm. Their lawyer, Peter Villari, is asking them a series of questions in order to show the judge that they fully understand what the settlement terms are.
The text that follows is the full transcript of that part of the hearing, except that I have omitted a few passages (marked by ellipses) where the lawyers discuss their fees and where there is a discussion (involving the judge and the lawyers) of the legal steps required to seal the settlement.
—
Mr. Villari [attorney representing the Hallowiches]: You’re both aware that, in exchange for the sum of $750,000, you have given up all rights that you may have against all of the defendants in this case now and forever?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: You accept that?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: You also understand that in exchange for that sum, you are required to turn over your home to the defendants in exchange for which you will be able to buy a new home?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes
Mr. Villari: You have relinquished and given up all rights to that real property?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: Do you understand that by this agreement each of you have been subjected to a confidentiality agreement, and I’ll use this phrase, for want of a better one, which is in essence a gag order? You are not to comment, as I read it, in any fashion whatsoever about Marcellus Shale/fracking activities, and you accept that?
Mr. Hallowich: Unfortunately, yes.
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: I would like to correct for the record, I did not draft this totally. There is an agreement that was drafted with all counsel involved. You understand that –
Judge Pozonsky: It was just my reference that the petition was submitted by you as their attorney. I stand corrected for the record.
Mr. Vallari: You both understand and accept that as written the settlement agreement may apply to your children’s First Amendment rights as well?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: I ask you these questions so that there is no disagreement in the future that I fully advised you as to what the intent and scope of that agreement may be. You understand that?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Judge Pozonsky: Sir, it’s just for the record, I need you to verbalize the response, that’s all.
Mr. Villari: Yes.
Mr. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: And you accept that because you, as adults and as legal guardians and parents of these children, are accepting these terms and conditions because you believe it is in the best interests of not only them but your family?
Mr. Hallowich: Yes, and health reasons. We needed to do this in order to get them out of this situation.
Mr. Villari: Stephanie, yes?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: You understand, Stephanie, I asked you specifically because, in fact, I continue to, regardless of what may be said about you on the Internet and blogs, and it continues, you cannot respond and you will not respond?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: Chris?
Mr. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Villari: Neither can you do that on her behalf?
Mr. Hallowich: Yes.
….
Mr. Villari: One last question. You understand that this record has also been requested to be sealed and that you have consented to it being sealed, which means that no one from this point forward will ever be able to review this record or have any understanding of what has happened here today or in the past lawsuit in which you, yourselves, were the defendants?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Hallowich: In order to protect the children, yes.
Mr. Villari: You accept that?
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
….
Mrs. Hallowich: We have agreed to this because we needed to get the children out of there for their health and safety. My concern is they’re minors. I’m not quite sure I fully understand. We know we’re signing for silence forever, but how is this taking away our children’s rights being minors now? I mean, my daughter is turning 7 today, my son is 10. How – I guess that concerns me that we need to keep them safe, but –
Judge Pozonsky: Do you want to address that?
Mr. Villari: I have counseled both Chris and Stephanie, as drafted, the order could be read to forever bar their two children from ever commenting on anything to do with fracking or Marcellus Shale. I have counseled them that they are minors. I, frankly, Your Honor, as an attorney, to be honest with you, I don’t know if that’s possible that you can give up the First Amendment rights of a child. I don’t know. The defense has requested that be a part of the petition as worded. I will tell you honestly, we objected, but again It was a take it or leave it situation and these people have made, I think, a wise decision on behalf of their family. They continue to offer this concern to defense counsel. We’re not objecting to this settlement –
Mrs. Hallowich: No, no –
Mr. Villari: — we’re not consenting.
Mrs. Hallowich: — No.
Mr. Villari: But I will tell you as an attorney, I just don’t know whether you can affect the First Amendment rights of a minor in a proceeding like this, and the agreement does do that, in my opinion.
That’ s why I have counseled them. I have told them in an abundance of caution, and I’ll be frank with you, to protect my law firm because I don’t feel like someone coming around when they turn 18 and saying, “Look what you did to me.” The fact remains as written it could easily be used against the two of them when they become of majority. I think that does –
Judge Pozonsky: Does defense counsel have any comment for the record?
Mr. Swetz [attorney for Range Resources]: I just want to stress that this agreement was consented to.
Mr. Villari: It was.
Mr. Swetz: We’ve all agreed to the provisions. The plaintiffs, the punitive plaintiffs in this case, the Hallowiches, are defined as the whole family. That’s the way the contract has been written. That’s what we’ve agreed to. Putting aside all these other issues and sort of ancillary topics, that’s what the settlement says, and that’s what we’ve agreed to at this point.
Mr. Villari: That’s precisely why I so counseled my clients, Your Honor, because, as they have indicated, it is directed at the family, and these two minor children are part of the family. Again, I will say I have practiced 30-some years. I will say on the record I’ve never seen a request like this nor in my research that I can find anything that says it can be done, but they have made a choice, and it is a choice that they have been counseled on and –
Judge Pozonsky: So noted.
Mr. Villari: That’s all I can say. And, Chris, I don’t have an answer for you or Stephanie other than what I’ve already told you, and I’m glad you brought this up because I want the Court to understand that it is a possibility.
Judge Pozonsky: Nor does the Court have an answer for you, and I would agree with counsel that I don’t know. That’s a law school question, I guess.
Mr. Swetz: I guess our position is it does apply to the whole family. We would certainly enforce it.
Judge Pozonsky: Right, and candidly, you, as the parents and the guardians, are bound by it. As it relates to your children, should they violate the terms and conditions, that would be up to defendants to enforce the provisions in whatever fashion and before whatever court that it might be appropriate.
Mr. Villari: The two of you can make a CYA speech where you stand on the record –
Judge Pozonsky: Correct.
Mr. Villari: I just don’t know.
Mrs. Hallowich: No.
Mr. Hallowich: If I may, no matter where we live, they’re going to be amongst other children that are children of people within this industry, and they’re going to be around it every single day of their life, that if they, in turn, say one of the illegal words when they’re outside of our guardianship, we’re going to have difficulty controlling that. We can inform them. We can tell them they cannot say this, they cannot say that, but if on the playground –
Judge Pozonsky: So noted.
Mr. Villari: I understand, you will do and you have accepted to do the best you can as parents to prevent that from happening.
Mrs. Hallowich: Yes.
Mr. Hallowich: Yes.
Judge Pozonsky: Based on the information before the Court, the Court will direct that the joint motion to file a petition for approval under seal of the confidential agreement attached thereto is granted, and the Court will sign that particular order, and at the request of the plaintiffs, the Court will now sign off on the order as well.
—
Now that the transcript, above, has been made public (along with other documents from the lawsuit), we know the nature of the gag order. But the order still remains in effect (as far as I have been able to determine). That means that the Hallowiches, including the children, are still barred from ever talking about fracking or the Marcellus Shale.
However, in February 2019 Stephanie Hallowich was summoned to appear before the grand jury empaneled by Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro to investigate “environmental crimes”, and she apparently did testify.
Dragonpipe Diary 