August 11, 2026

MASSACHUSETTS JURY FINDS SAND MINE OPERATOR LIABLE; TRIAL REVEALS NEW SILICA DUST AND HEALTH EVIDENCE

Nearly four years after CLWC published an investigation on the sand mining operating at 0 Meadow Street in Carver, Massachusetts— and after years of complaints by Meadow Street residents — a Plymouth Superior Court jury returned a verdict a 2023 case brought by two neighbors impacted by the operation. The jury awarded a total of $530,000 in damages to the neighbors. See it here: Jury Verdict: August 11, 2026

The Plymouth County Superior Court jury trial lasted from July 27 to August 11, 2026 when the jury returned the verdict on three claims under the 2023 complaint. The jury  found the sand mine operator G. Lopes Construction and the landowner Bette Maki operating under the Alex Johnson and Sons cranberry company liable under the three counts. First, under private nuisance, the jury found both G, Lopes Construction and Maki contributed to conditions substantially and unreasonably interfering with the neighbors’ use and enjoyment of their property. On that nuisance finding, it allocated 80% of the fault to G. Lopes Construction and 20% to Maki.

The jury separately found that G. Lopes Construction caused dust, sand, sediment or another thing for which it was legally responsible to enter the neighbors’ property, that the company was negligent, that the entry was not authorized by the neighbors and that the entry caused legally recoverable harm. On the negligent-trespass claim, the jury allocated 100% of the fault to G. Lopes Construction. The completed verdict slip awards each Beadling $15,000 for property damage and $200,000 for pain and suffering on that claim.

The verdict follows a trial based on new evidence about the silicon dioxide components of Carver loamy soil which was being mined and generated Respirable Crystalline Silica according to experts. The mining operation lasted over 13 years and generated at least 54,000 truck trips to haul the sand and gravel. The trucks passed within 35 feet of neighbors’ front doors, on narrow country roads, causing air pollution, noise and vibration compounded by the mining operation itself.

Below: Map showing forested land where the mining operation dredged in the Sole Source Aquifer. This is before the mining. Below is after the mining.

Above:  March 17, 2022. The mining site owned and operated by Maki and G. Lopes Construction at 0 Meadow Street. Before the mining, the area shown as a open water was  forested upland area. A total of 19 acres was strip mined and the operation dredged the Sole Source Aquifer, exposing it to contamination.

Wathc the Drone Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MPSWuw0BDI&t=6s

From complaints to accountability

At the trial, the plaintiffs testified that they had brought the situation to the Town’s attention since at least 2014 about sand covering the property, excessive noise, traffic and speeding trucks. Two neighbors who were not plaintiffs testified about vibrations from truck traffic so hard they caused a picture to fall off the wall.  Another testified that there was so much sand on his deck he used a leaf blower.

The trial record ultimately included resident testimony, company records, site sampling, laboratory silica analysis, meteorological analysis, engineering evidence, land-use and aquifer analysis, and pulmonary medical testimony.

The jury then made a finding that goes directly to the central issue CLWC reported on it blogs and to the Town in 2022: G. Lopes Construction negligently caused dust, sand or sediment to enter the neighboring property and cause legally recoverable harm.

About the trial

The two week trial involved 10 witnesses from the plaintiffs and five from the defendants, G. Lopes Construction and Maki. The lawsuit was first filed in April 2023, when the neighbors first challenged the town’s Earth Removal Permit issued to Maki despite over 10 years of complaints from the neighborhood about noise, dust and vibration from the mine. The complaint also contained claims for nuisance, negligence and negligent trespass.

In July, 2023, the plaintiffs requested an injunction to stop the mining until the lawsuit could be resolved.  They supported the request for an injunction with the expert affidavit of Gary James, P.E. and photographs and testimony from the neighbors showing sand covering cars and the yard.  See the Affidavits Here  On  July 17, 2023, Superior Court Judge Glenny denied the injunction. The mine continued to operated until March 2024.  In the meantime, residents appealed to the Appeals Court but did not prevail and the mine kept opereating.  More available here: Appeals Court proceedings.

The trial testimony established that there were at least 54,000 truck trips through the residential neighborhood, up to 120 trips on some days, that the defendants were repeatedly notified about sand, dust and noise; a company safety official offered to power-wash the house and provided car-wash tickets because sand had blown from the site; the excavation intercepted the groundwater table; and the neighborhood relies on wells drawing from the aquifer

Scientific evidence on silica dust and wind directions

Environmental engineering expert Scott Hersey testified that that four samples collected on June 11, 2025 contained material met the conditions he identified for respirable crystalline silica (RSC). He concluded that wind conditions made it more likely than not that dust from the site reached the plaintiffs’ home and that RCS from the mining operation more likely than not entered the property.

Hersey compared approximately 1.12 million meteorological observations with 25 documented dust events and found mine-to-home winds during the preceding 24 hours for 20 of those 25 events.

Pulmonary expert evaluated possible silica-related health effects

Pulmonary specialist Stephen L. Newman, M.D., testified at the trial about a peer review of the residents’ pulmonary complaints and their possible relationship to silica-dust exposure. The medical expert did not diagnose them with silicosis, but stated that one of them was at risk for progressive silicosis and associated complications given what Dr. Newman characterized as prolonged extensive unprotected exposure to silica dust.

As to the second  resident, Dr.Newman reported bilateral lower-lobe interstitial lung disease typical of rheumatoid lung disease, with possible atypical, accelerated silicosis. He identified both prolonged silica exposure and rheumatoid arthritis in his causation analysis.

These medical opinions should be understood alongside the site’s later silica testing and dust-transport analysis. They are expert opinions; the jury verdict itself should not be characterized as a diagnosis of silicosis.

Above: March, 2022. One of many photos documenting sand emissions from the 0 Meadow Street sand mine. Expert testimony gave the opinion that to a reasonable degree of engineering certainty it was more probable than not that the sand contained RSC, a health hazard, and that the plaintiffs were exposed inside their home as well as in their yard.

Engineering and scientific experts also evaluated the operation itself

Professional Wetland Scientist Brandon Faneuf concluded that approximately the operation did not comply with the site plans and encroached within 277 of the plaintiffs’ home. He testified this was a commercial mining operation, not “cranberry agriculture” as claimed. In a separate report, Mr. Faneuf shows 19.3 acres were disturbed and that the mining exceeded the 10.99-acre excavation area depicted in the Draft Gilmore plan. He also concluded that part of the mining occurred in the federally designated Plymouth-Carver Sole Source Aquifer.

Professional engineer James DeVellis concluded that the operation more likely than not caused sand and dust to reach the Beadlings’ home and that ordinary dust-control measures expected at earth-removal operations near residences were lacking.

Role of the cranberry industry in sand mining

Like many mining operations in Southeastern Massachusetts, this mining operation dredged sand and gravel from the Sole Source Aquifer to maximize the volume of sand and gravel for commercial sale. Estimates of the commercial value of the sand and gravel is up to $11 million at today’s prices. Testimony at the trial showed G. Lopes Construction paid Maki at least $670,340 for materials removed from 2012 to about 2023. The total amount paid to Maki likely exceeded $770,000 through March 2024.

These sand and gravel dredging operations are ubiquitous throughout the region. Cranberry companies claim the dredging is part of normal cranberry operations.  They claim they are building a “water hole” or reservoir to supply their cranberry bogs, or a “tailwater pond” to collect polluted water that discharges off the bogs.  Find out more here.  Watch the short documentary,  Sand Wars: An investigation into the money, politics and corruption behind sand mining and its silent environmental crisis in Southeastern Massachusetts.  Website: www.sandwarssoutheasternma.org

Town’s role 

Sand and gravel mining extraction requires a municipal permit in Massachusetts — and little or no state permitting. In Carver, the Earth Removal Committee (ERC) is responsible for local permitting of sand and gravel mining. In 2011, the ERC granted Maki a permit for 545,000 cubic yards of earth removal for a “cranberry reservoir.”  The permit expired in 2016, but the Town allowed the operation to continue, until residents brought the situation to their attention. The Town issued a cease and desist in September 2022, but then issued a new permit allowing it to continue until March, 2024. 

The Town allowed G.Lopes Construction and Maki to operate with speeding trucks, violations of the 25-truckload per day limit, and excavation in the groundwater despite residents’ concerns.  The ERC has conflicts of interest because the majority are in the cranberry, trucking or excavation business. 

ERC issues second permit in March, 2023

Despite the harm to the residents and environment, the ERC issued Maki and Lopes a second permit in March, 2023. GAF Engineering, Lopes and Maki filed for the new earth removal permit to extend the illegal operation for another 15 months.  Speaking about the public hearings on the permit a spokesperson for Carver Concerned Citizens said,

“To say that we are disappointed is an understatement. I wonder what it is going to take for the ERC to do their job, which is to protect the residents of Carver.  I have yet to see one board in this town do the right thing. When residents showed the ERC pictures of silica sand from the operation covering their property and described the excessive and concussive noise and vibrations they have endured for a decade, causing cracks in their home’s foundations, we were treated with disrespect and dismissed. Town officials work for the residents, not for the sand and gravel industry.”

 

The public asked the ERC, Board of Selectmen, Carver Police Department, Building Inspector and Board of Health for years to protect the residents from excessive truck traffic, silica dust, noise, and vibration. Residents complaints and concerns continue to be dismissed and disregarded today. Trucks run after hours with no consequences.

State government’s role

Massachusetts officials have failed to take action to address sand and gravel mining in Southeastern Massachusetts and other parts of the state. There is no state licensing program that the sand mines follow. The Governor has ignored residents’ appeals for almost 5 years. 

State environmental and public health agencies have failed to act. One example is the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. On March 28, 2022, Ten Residents of Carver filed an appeal with the agency challenging Maki’s claim of an exemption from the Wetlands Protection Act. In 2022 the MassDEP and Environmental Strike Force did a site visit to view site. The DEP ruled on July 30, 2022 that the reservoir was three times the size needed for 12 acres of bog and was not exempt agriculture. The DEP continued to allow the mine to operate, dredging in the aquifer for another two years!

On December 5, 2022 ten residents sent a Citizens Suit Law demand letter and notice of intent to sue to the Carver Earth Removal Committee and Massachusetts Attorney General over illegal mining. It has been ignored.