When Sinkholes Become Legal Problems

Sinkholes can cause property damage, injury to people and harm to the environment. It is therefore not surprising that myriad legal issues arise in the context of sinkholes and the actual and potential harms they present. This paper will focus on those legal issues and will include a discussion of potential causes of action (i.e., legal claims), both under statutory laws (e.g., state laws like in Pennsylvania under which sinkholes can be deemed a nuisance) and common law (i.e., claims derived from longstanding judicial precedent), and available damages (i.e., monetary compensation) and other remedies. Mining activities and water supply wells for industrial, commercial and residential uses, which pump groundwater in karst and other sinkhole prone areas, are often a direct cause of sinkholes. Yet most government agencies regulating mining and other related industries are ill-equipped, either technically or politically, to manage the potential, and in some cases, inevitable damage. Few, in fact, recognize the direct relationship between activities they typically permit, the formation of sinkholes, and the resulting harms. This paper will also discuss both bringing a case for sinkhole remediation (direct lawsuits and mining permit appeals) and defending sinkhole-related claims. Because cases involving karst terrain and sinkholes tend to turn on the presentation of highly technical scientific principles, educating the court is critical, as is the experience and expertise of a top-notch expert witness. This paper will discuss the ways to effectively present such cases in court, including the presentation of technical witnesses/ experts. Two case studies will be examined. One case involves a school and a neighboring quarry, in which the court found that a quarry was the direct cause of sinkholes opening in the surrounding area. As a result, the court held that the quarry constituted a nuisance, and therefore denied a permit extension allowing further mining. Another case study will examine sinkholes opening near a major roadway in an area where no mining is known to have occurred. Introduction Sinkholes can lead to significant physical, economic, and environmental harm. A party impacted by sinkholes may have several viable causes of action against other parties and, in certain circumstances, legal recourse against government agencies. This paper is intended to provide a general overview of the legal landscape surrounding sinkhole litigation, including preventative measures, claims, defenses, and available remedies. Overview of Common Legal Issues Implicated by Sinkholes The common thread running through the wide range of legal issues that arise surrounding the threat and occurrence of collapse sinkholes can be boiled down to one word: causation. The question of who or what caused the sinkhole at issue is the lodestar of any claim, defense, or regulatory or enforcement action. Given the highly technical issues involved, and the fact that the conditions leading to the opening of a sinkhole are subterranean (and thus unobservable by a judge or jury), the responsibility of proving or disproving the alleged cause of a sinkhole falls to expert witnesses. Bringing Legal Claims Related to Sinkholes A party may bring a number of tort claims (i.e., claims based on some type of harm caused by another person or party) related to the occurrence of collapse sinkholes depending on the circumstances presented and the party’s ultimate objective. These claims overwhelmingly arise under state law rather than federal law. This paper is not intended to describe in detail the law of any particular state, but rather to provide a general overview of the types of claims that are most commonly invoked in sinkhole cases. Fortunately, most state law claims are derived from the common law, and as a result, the causes of action are the same or very similar from state to state. Negligence is one of the most common claims asserted by parties affected by sinkholes. In order to prevail on a negligence claim, a plaintiff must show that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff, that the defendant breached that duty, and that the breach caused an injury Steven T. Miano Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller, One Logan Square, 27th Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, United States, smiano@hangley.com Peter V. Keays Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller, One Logan Square, 27th Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, United States, pkeays@hangley.com