The 11 holders of 443 acres leased to shale gas drilling companies set to receive financial benefits from the Geyer Well on Denny Road are suing those who challenged the Middlesex Township zoning amendment.

A lawsuit was filed on May 22 in Butler County Court by 11 Adams and Middlesex residents who said they were deprived of the financial gain they would have realized had the challenge not been filed.

The suit accuses the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, the Clean Air Council, Middlesex residents David Denk, Jennifer Chomicki, Anthony Lapina and Joann Groman, as well as Mars parent group leader Amy Nassif, of “improper activity and interference” with their gas leases by mounting the challenge to a zoning amendment approved in August by the Middlesex supervisors that determines where shale gas operations can take place in the township.

The lawsuit says the defendants, “acting in concert with one another, engaged in a campaign and common plan to interfere with the contractual relationships between the (leaseholders) and (drilling companies) by making false, misleading or inflammatory public statements, presenting improper and unfounded appeals and wrongful and/or unsupported affidavits before the zoning hearing board.”

The suit said Rex Energy announced on Nov. 11 that it would cease all actions regarding leases “as a result of the improper activity and interference of the defendants.”

It said the defendants did not file the challenge “for any legitimate purpose,” but did it to intentionally “cause delays and extra expense in the performance of the contract” between leaseholders and drillers.

Throughout the suit, the challengers’ actions are called a “sham,” “malicious,” a “scorched-earth campaign,” and “misuse of the legal process.”

The suit accuses the challengers of dampening the drillers willingness to negotiate new leases, depriving leaseholders and potential leaseholders of the benefit of signing bonuses and royalties, and acting together unlawfully in the challenge to deprive property owners of the financial benefit of leasing with a driller,

It also accuses the challengers of making false, misleading or inflammatory public statements, filing the challenge to the zoning amendment for improper and unlawful purposes, and “intentionally misstating the known facts and health issues ... with regard to dissemination of false, misleading and inflammatory statements.”

The leaseholders are asking for monetary compensation from the challengers in excess of $35,000, but believed to be “in excess of hundreds of thousands of dollars,” plus punitive damages and costs.

Joseph Otis Minott, the Clean Air Council’s chief attorney and executive director, said the suit will be vigorously fought.

“I think it is obviously an attempt to prevent our First Amendment rights to appeal what we think is a bad zoning decision,” Minott said. “I think the courts will see it as such.”

He said he has not yet been officially served with the lawsuit, but was aware it was filed. Minott said it will be up to each party named as defendants what counsel to hire or if, in the case of an organization, internal resources will be available to provide an attorney.

Minott said he does not know if he will serve as an attorney on the case.

“But I know we will defend, collectively and individually, our First Amendment rights on this one,” Minott said.

Those bringing the lawsuit are Dewey Homes and Investment Properties, Mark Vinson, Matthew Vinson, Joseph Elm, Mark Gissendaner, Bradley Kress, Brian Kress, Albert and Charlotte McKee, Dean and Sharon Weigle, Ronald Molinaro and Jean Utz.

None of the challengers named in the lawsuit could be reached for comment on Wednesday.

The suit was filed by Richard Sandow and Ronald Amrhein of the Pittsburgh law firm of Jones Gregg Creehan & Gerace.