Dallas Partners Obtain Complete Defense Verdict Against Negligence, Products Liablity Claims of More Than $15M

Assigning Fault in Negligence and Products Liability Claims

The case began when Plaintiffs United Operations, LLC, America First Energy, and Day Energy drilled a wildcat well in South Texas. The well encountered repeated lost circulation and casing integrity problems, necessitating pressure testing and cement squeezes. Plaintiffs’ well engineer decided to perform a liner top pressure test, and he directed co-defendant Cinch Wireline Services to source a composite bridge plug to be used in the testing and cementing of the liner top.

Cinch contacted OSP to obtain a suitable tool, and OSP disclosed that it did not stock a composite bridge plug but instead offered a composite cement retainer that could function as a plug when set on wireline — a fact confirmed by multiple fact witnesses and experts at trial. During the installation process, United instructed Cinch not to run a gauge ring or junk basket before setting the tool, contrary to the applicable standard of care. The tool was set, held pressure as a plug up to 1,000 PSI, but then apparently moved downhole, making it very difficult to drill the tool out.

Subsequently, after Plaintiffs engaged in prolonged efforts to fish remaining pieces of metal out of the well and also combatted ongoing formation integrity problems, the drill string became differentially stuck due to formation conditions, causing Plaintiffs to abandon the well. Plaintiffs alleged that the stuck drill string and loss of the well were all attributable to problems with the tool. Plaintiffs alleged that they were not made aware that the tool was actually a cement retainer and not a true composite bridge plug and denied that they were aware the tool contained metal components. Plaintiffs also alleged that the tool was incorrectly assembled in the field and that the tool was set incorrectly by the wireline company.

Plaintiffs sued defendants for negligence, products liability, and DTPA violations, claiming OSP misrepresented the tool as a “composite bridge plug” and that the tool’s metal components and movement caused the loss of the well. Plaintiffs sought damages for the costs associated with fishing pieces of the tool out of the well, for the cost to plug and abandon the well and the costs to drill a new well at the same location, which totaled more than $15 million.

Defendants denied that they made any misrepresentations in connection with the properties or functionality of the tool and denied that Plaintiffs were unaware of the characteristics of the tool before it was installed in the well. Defendants further denied that the tool had been incorrectly assembled and denied that it was incorrectly installed. Defendants alleged that Plaintiffs bore responsibility for problems with the setting of the tool due to Plaintiffs decision not to run a gauge ring and junk basket in the well prior to setting the tool. Defendants denied that problems with the tool caused the drill string to become stuck and that such problems were instead attributable to pre-existing problems with the formation. Defendants also disputed Plaintiffs’ damage models as being excessive.

The jury returned a complete defense verdict for OSP, finding: (1) 100% of the fault attributable to Plaintiff United Operations, LLC; (2) zero fault attributable to OSP; (3) no liability on the negligence claim; (4) no liability on the products liability claim; (5) no liability on the DTPA claim; and (6) zero damages awarded to Plaintiffs.