Chesapeake Energy (CHK)

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in 2003 in the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. The defendants appealed the judgment and on May 22, 2008, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. On October 22, 2008, the parties in the Tawney matter entered into a settlement agreement providing for the establishment of a settlement fund of $380 million. The Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia approved the settlement following a fairness hearing on November 22, 2008, and entered an order to discharge the judgment on January 21, 2009. Chesapeake’s share of the settlement fund was approximately $41 million, which amount had previously been fully reserved. The Circuit Court retains continuing jurisdiction over the case during the claims administration process in which the settlement amount is distributed to the members of the plaintiff class.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in 2003 in the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. The defendants appealed the judgment and on May 22, 2008, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. On October 22, 2008, the parties in the Tawney matter entered into a settlement agreement providing for the establishment of a settlement fund of $380 million. The Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia approved the settlement following a fairness hearing on November 22, 2008, and entered an order to discharge the judgment on January 21, 2009. Chesapeake’s share of the settlement fund was approximately $41 million, which amount had previously been fully reserved. The Circuit Court retains continuing jurisdiction over the case during the claims administration process in which the settlement amount is distributed to the members of the plaintiff class.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

14

Table of Contents

CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in

29

Table of Contents

2003 in the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. The defendants appealed the judgment and on May 22, 2008, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. On October 22, 2008, the parties in the Tawney matter entered into a settlement agreement providing for the establishment of a settlement fund of $380 million. The Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia approved the settlement following a fairness hearing on November 22, 2008, and entered an order to discharge the judgment on January 21, 2009. Chesapeake’s share of the settlement fund was approximately $41 million, which amount had previously been fully reserved. The Circuit Court retains continuing jurisdiction over the case during the claims administration process in which the settlement amount is distributed to the members of the plaintiff class.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

Not applicable.

30

Table of Contents

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume
measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural
Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in

29

Table of Contents

2003 in the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting
post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after
July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices
for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

FACE="Times New Roman" SIZE="2">On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found
fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. The defendants appealed the judgment and on May 22, 2008,
the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. On October 22, 2008, the parties in the Tawney matter entered into a settlement agreement providing for the establishment of a settlement fund of $380 million. The
Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia approved the settlement following a fairness hearing on November 22, 2008, and entered an order to discharge the judgment on January 21, 2009. Chesapeake’s share of the settlement fund was
approximately $41 million, which amount had previously been fully reserved. The Circuit Court retains continuing jurisdiction over the case during the claims administration process in which the settlement amount is distributed to the members of the
plaintiff class.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our
opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

SIZE="2">Not applicable.

30

Table of Contents

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in 2003 in the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. The defendants appealed the judgment and on May 22, 2008, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. On October 22, 2008, the parties in the Tawney matter entered into a settlement agreement providing for the establishment of a settlement fund of $380 million. The Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia approved the settlement following a fairness hearing on November 22, 2008, and entered an order to discharge the judgment on January 21, 2009. Chesapeake’s share of the settlement fund was approximately $41 million, which amount had previously been fully reserved. The Circuit Court retains continuing jurisdiction over the case during the claims administration process in which the settlement amount is distributed to the members of the plaintiff class.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in 2003 in the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, has managed the litigation and indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. On June 28, 2007, the Circuit Court sustained the jury verdict for punitive damages, and on September 27, 2007, it denied all post-trial motions. The defendants stayed the judgment during the pendency of their appeal to the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals by filing an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $50 million. They filed their initial Petition for Appeal on January 24, 2008. On May 22, 2008, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. NiSource and Chesapeake filed two petitions for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court on August 20, 2008, asserting among other things that their constitutional rights were violated by the manner in which punitive damages were awarded, the amount of punitive damages, and the lack of meaningful state court appellate review of the punitive damages award. The U.S. Supreme Court may or may not decide to accept the appeal. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has granted a stay of the judgment until the proceedings before the U.S. Supreme Court are concluded.

On October 22, 2008, the parties in the Tawney matter entered into a settlement agreement providing for the establishment of a settlement fund of $380 million, and the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia granted preliminary approval of the settlement on October 23, 2008. The settlement is subject to final approval by the Circuit Court, following a fairness hearing currently scheduled for November 22, 2008. Chesapeake’s share of the prospective settlement fund would be approximately $41 million, which amount has previously been fully reserved. If the settlement receives final approval, NiSource and Chesapeake intend to withdraw their U.S. Supreme Court certiorari petitions. Chesapeake believes this litigation will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in 2003 in the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, has managed the litigation and indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. On June 28, 2007, the Circuit Court sustained the jury verdict for punitive damages, and on September 27, 2007, it denied all post-trial motions. The defendants stayed the judgment during the pendency of their appeal to the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals by filing an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $50 million. They filed their initial Petition for Appeal on January 24, 2008. On May 22, 2008, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. NiSource and Chesapeake filed two petitions for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court on August 20, 2008, asserting among other things that their constitutional rights were violated by the manner in which punitive damages were awarded, the amount of punitive damages, and the lack of meaningful state court appellate review of the punitive damages award. The U.S. Supreme Court may or may not decide to accept the appeal. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has granted a stay of the judgment until the proceedings before the U.S. Supreme Court are concluded.

On October 22, 2008, the parties in the Tawney matter entered into a settlement agreement providing for the establishment of a settlement fund of $380 million, and the Circuit Court for Roane County, West Virginia granted preliminary approval of the settlement on October 23, 2008. The settlement is subject to final approval by the Circuit Court, following a fairness hearing currently scheduled for November 22, 2008. Chesapeake’s share of the prospective settlement fund would be approximately $41 million, which amount has previously been fully reserved. If the settlement receives final approval, NiSource and Chesapeake intend to withdraw their U.S. Supreme Court certiorari petitions. Chesapeake believes this litigation will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed in 2003 in the Circuit Court of Roane County, West Virginia by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, has managed the litigation and indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. On June 28, 2007, the Circuit Court sustained the jury verdict for punitive damages, and on September 27, 2007, it denied all post-trial motions. The defendants stayed the judgment during the pendency of their appeal to the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals by filing an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $50 million. They filed their initial Petition for Appeal on January 24, 2008. On May 22, 2008, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals refused to hear the appeal. NiSource and Chesapeake intend to file a petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court in August 2008, asserting among other things that their constitutional rights were violated by the manner in which punitive damages were awarded, the amount of punitive damages, and the lack of meaningful state court appellate review of the punitive damages award. The U.S. Supreme Court may or may not decide to accept the appeal. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has granted a stay of the judgment until September 23, 2008, pending further appeal.

Chesapeake has established an accrual for amounts it believes will not be indemnified. We have also recorded a non-current payable in the amount of the additional damages awarded the plaintiffs and an equal offsetting receivable for the expected NiSource indemnification if a final nonappealable judgment for the verdict amount should be entered. Chesapeake believes this litigation will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

12

Table of Contents

CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly-owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Roane County, West Virginia filed in 2003 by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, has managed the litigation and indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. Most of the damages awarded by the jury relate to issues not yet addressed by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, although in June 2006 that Court ruled against the defendants on two certified questions regarding the deductibility of post-production expenses. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. On June 28, 2007, the Circuit Court sustained the jury verdict for punitive damages, and on September 27, 2007, it denied all post-trial motions. Subsequently defendants filed an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $50 million in order to stay the judgment pending appeal. On January 24, 2008, the defendants filed their initial Petition for Appeal in the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, and on April 14, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a response, a cross petition and other motions.

Chesapeake and NiSource maintain CNR acted in good faith and paid royalties in accordance with lease terms and West Virginia law. Chesapeake has established an accrual for amounts it believes will not be indemnified. Should a final nonappealable judgment be entered, Chesapeake believes its share of damages will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

12

Table of Contents

CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Roane County, West Virginia filed in 2003 by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, has managed the litigation and indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. Most of the damages awarded by the jury relate to issues not yet addressed by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, although in June 2006 that Court ruled against the defendants on two certified questions regarding the deductibility of post-production expenses. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. On June 28, 2007, the Circuit Court sustained the jury verdict for punitive damages, and on September 27, 2007, it denied all post-trial motions, including defendants’ motion for judgment as a matter of law, or in the alternative, for a new trial. The defendants’ motion for stay pending appeal is set for hearing on November 16, 2007.

Chesapeake and NiSource maintain CNR acted in good faith and paid royalties in accordance with lease terms and West Virginia law, and will appeal the final judgment. Chesapeake has established an accrual for amounts it believes will not be indemnified. Should a final nonappealable judgment be entered, Chesapeake believes its share of damages will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Roane County, West Virginia filed in 2003 by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, has managed the litigation and indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

16

Table of Contents

CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. Most of the damages awarded by the jury relate to issues not yet addressed by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, although in June 2006 that Court ruled against the defendants on two certified questions regarding the deductibility of post-production expenses. The jury found fraudulent conduct by the defendants with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions. On June 28, 2007, the Circuit Court sustained the jury verdict for punitive damages.

After judgment has been entered, Chesapeake and NiSource intend to file additional post-trial motions seeking to set aside the judgment. Chesapeake and NiSource maintain CNR acted in good faith and paid royalties in accordance with lease terms and West Virginia law, and will appeal unless the judgment is substantially reduced as a result of post-trial motions. Chesapeake has established an accrual for amounts it believes will not be indemnified. Should a final nonappealable judgment be entered, Chesapeake believes its share of damages will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Litigation

We are involved in various disputes incidental to our business operations, including claims from royalty owners regarding volume measurements, post-production costs and prices for royalty calculations. In Tawney, et al. v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., Chesapeake’s wholly owned subsidiary Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., formerly known as Columbia Natural Resources, LLC (CNR), is a defendant in a class action lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Roane County, West Virginia filed in 2003 by royalty owners. The plaintiffs allege that CNR underpaid royalties by improperly deducting post-production costs, failing to pay royalty on total volumes of natural gas produced and not paying a fair value for the natural gas produced from their leases. The plaintiff class consists of West Virginia royalty owners receiving royalties after July 31, 1990 from CNR. Chesapeake acquired CNR in

16

Table of Contents

CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)

November 2005, and its seller acquired CNR in 2003 from NiSource Inc. NiSource, a co-defendant in the case, has managed the litigation and indemnified Chesapeake against underpayment claims based on the use of fixed prices for natural gas production sold under certain forward sale contracts and other claims with respect to CNR’s operations prior to September 2003.

On January 27, 2007, the Circuit Court jury returned a verdict against the defendants of $404 million, consisting of $134 million in compensatory damages and $270 million in punitive damages. Most of the damages awarded by the jury relate to issues not yet addressed by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, although in June 2006 that Court ruled against the defendants on two certified questions regarding the deductibility of post-production expenses. The jury found fraud with respect to the sales prices used to calculate royalty payments and with respect to the failure of CNR to disclose post-production deductions.

Chesapeake and NiSource maintain CNR acted in good faith and paid royalties in accordance with lease terms and West Virginia law, and we intend to appeal any adverse judgment in the case. On March 5, 2007, the Circuit Court heard a joint motion for post-trial review of punitive damages filed by Chesapeake and NiSource. The Circuit Court has indicated it will rule on the motion in May 2007. Chesapeake has established an accrual for amounts it believes will not be indemnified. Should a final nonappealable judgment be entered, Chesapeake believes its share of damages will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Chesapeake is subject to other legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the final resolution of these proceedings and claims will not have a material effect on the company.

Litigation

Chesapeake is currently involved in various disputes incidental to its business operations. Management, after consultation with legal counsel, is of the opinion that the final resolution of all currently pending or threatened litigation is not likely to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Litigation

Chesapeake is currently involved in various disputes incidental to its business operations. Management, after consultation with legal counsel, is of the opinion that the final resolution of all currently pending or threatened litigation is not likely to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Litigation

Chesapeake is currently involved in various disputes incidental to its business operations. Management, after consultation with legal counsel, is of the opinion that the final resolution of all currently pending or threatened litigation is not likely to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Litigation

Chesapeake is currently involved in various disputes incidental to its business operations. Management, after consultation with legal counsel, is of the opinion that the final resolution of all currently pending or threatened litigation is not likely to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.