Rudy Webb v. Exxon Mobil Corporation

Rule of Law:

Under Arkansas law, an easement contract that grants the right to maintain and repair but does not contain an express provision imposing an affirmative duty of maintenance does not implicitly create such a duty for the easement holder. A claim for misuse of the easement requires evidence of actual physical injury to the servient estate.

Facts:

• Between 1947 and 1948, Magnolia Pipe Line Company, a predecessor to Exxon, entered into a series of easement contracts with landowners to construct an oil pipeline.
• The contracts granted the company the right to 'lay, repair, maintain, operate and remove pipe lines' and reserved for the landowners the right to 'fully use and enjoy the said premises except for the purposes hereinbefore granted.'
• The contracts specified that the pipeline company must pay for 'any damages that may arise to crops, timber or fences from the use of said premises.'
• Rudy and Betty Webb and Arnez and Charletha Harper are successors-in-interest to these easement contracts for properties in Arkansas.
• Over its history, the pipeline, now operated by Exxon, has experienced several oil 'releases,' including a significant one near Mayflower, Arkansas, in 2013.
• The Webbs and Harpers allege the pipeline is composed of 'bad pipe' and is 'worn out,' but they concede that Exxon has not caused any damage to the crops, timber, or fences on their specific properties and have not shown any other physical injury to their land.

Procedural Posture:

• A group of landowners, including the Webbs and Harpers, filed a class action lawsuit against Exxon in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
• The district court initially certified the class but later, on Exxon's motion for reconsideration, decertified the class.
• Simultaneously, the district court granted Exxon's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiffs' claims with prejudice.
• The plaintiffs' subsequent motion to alter or amend the judgment was denied by the district court.
• The remaining plaintiffs, the Webbs and Harpers, appealed the decertification, the grant of summary judgment, and the denial of their motion to alter the judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.