For the Osage Indian Tribe, it’s more like “IMBY if you pay me”. In the latest interation of United States and Osage Minerals Council v. Osage Wind LLC et al the US District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma awarded...more
The question in Rock River Minerals, LP and Carr v. v. Pioneer Natural Resources, et al.: Did an assignment of overriding royalty interests in Texas oil and gas leases include a depth limitation? No....more
Briggs v. Southwestern Energy Production Company, LLC is good news for Pennsylvania mineral owners bringing claims for subsurface trespass by fracking.
In 2018 in “Briggs 1”, the Briggs family sued SWN for subsurface...more
Itching to sue the government for taking your property? Treme v. St. John the Baptist Parish Council is a reminder that you must have a property interest subject to being taken in order to have standing to sue for a...more
Recent Texas royalty cases seem to feature litigants on the fixed royalty side trying, more often than not in vain, to escape the clutches of Van Dyke v. Navigator and Hysaw v. Dawkins. See those decisions for the history of...more
Landowner and mineral owner (that includes you, lessee): Under ETC Texas Pipeline, Ltd. v. Ageron Energy, LLC, your right to sue for damages for tort or trespass could pass into history before you even know you have a claim....more
2/29/2024
/ Article III ,
Damages ,
Energy Policy ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Land Owners ,
Mineral Exploration ,
Mineral Extraction ,
Mineral Leases ,
Mineral Rights ,
Oil & Gas ,
Standing ,
Tort ,
Trespass
In Texas, no. Read on to learn why. In Nortex Minerals LP v. Blackbeard Operating LLC et al, the question was the meaning of this limited assignment provision in the “Alliance Leases”, oil and gas leases covering 27,000 acres...more
See yesterday’s post on Iskandia Operating, LLC v. SWEPI, LP -
SWEPI’s motion for summary judgment alleged that Iskandia presented no evidence of one or more elements of its trespass claim, noting that the Supreme Court of...more
The Duhig Rule is back, this time in Echols Minerals LLC, et al v. Green et al.
Framing the discussion, Duhig v. Peavy Moore Lumber Company and Trial v. Dragon -
In Duhig the grantor in a general warranty deed...more
The question in Self v, BPX Operating Company is how to balance the Louisiana Civil Code Art 2292 principle of negotiorum gestio against Louisiana’s conservation statutes....more
Parish of Plaquemines v. Northcoast Oil Co. is yet another remand of yet another of the 43 suits filed in state courts against a legion of oil and gas companies under the Louisiana’s State and Local Coastal Resources...more
Can the Texas lessee perpetuate his oil and gas lease by “constructive participation” in wells drilled by another? Under the facts in Cromwell v. Anadarko E&P Onshore, LLC, the answer is no....more
If you are scoring at home, count Permico Royalties LLC v. Barron Properties, Ltd., as a win for “floating” in the fixed-or-floating royalty battles. Permico, successor to grantors in a 1937 Deed for a tract in Ward County,...more
Rhetorical Question: When will Texas be done with fixed/floating royalty cases such as Johnson et al v. Clifton et al?
Rhetorical Answer: When scriveners of deeds that are open to eight conceivably plausible meanings...more
Producers disappointed by the Supreme Court’s holding in Devon Energy Production v. Sheppard might have reason to feel vindicated. The question in HL Hawkins Jr., Inc. v. Capitan Energy Inc. et al. was whether producer...more
The plain, ordinary, and generally accepted meaning of a word doesn’t mean “anything goes”. It depends on context, says the Supreme Court of Texas in Finley Resources Inc. v. Headington Royalty Inc., a dispute over the...more
California has passed Senate Bill 1137, which will prohibit drilling of new oil and gas wells and reworking of existing wells in certain areas.
Here is SB 1137 in legislativese (analysis comes first, then the text)...more
7/19/2023
/ Ballot Measures ,
California ,
Energy Policy ,
Energy Reform ,
Infrastructure ,
Mineral Exploration ,
Mineral Extraction ,
Oil & Gas ,
Proposed Legislation ,
Regulatory Agenda ,
Well Drilling
The Austin Court of Appeals has ruled in Texas Railroad Commission et al v. Opiela, the dispute over a permit for a horizontal well under a Production Sharing Agreement. We reported on the result in the trial court. Here are...more
Can a non-operating working interest in a Texas oil and gas lease be adversely possessed? The Amarillo Court of Appeals said yes in PBEX II, LLC v. Dorchester Minerals, L.P....more
Freeeport-McMoRan Oil and Gas, LLC and Ovintiv USA Inc. v. 1776 Energy Partners LLC presented a recurring question faced by Texas oil and gas producers: When can proceeds of production be withheld by the operator without...more
6/2/2023
/ Contract Terms ,
Gas Royalties ,
Gross Proceeds ,
Mineral Extraction ,
Mineral Leases ,
Mineral Rights ,
Natural Resources ,
Oil & Gas ,
Safe Harbors ,
Texas ,
TX Supreme Court
And what a difference it was! In Apache Corp. v. Apollo Expl. LLC et al, Apache and others acquired an oil and gas lease on 100,000+ acres in the Texas Panhandle. The primary term was three years. The effective date was...more
Imagine these facts in a force majeure dispute (as presented in Point Energy Partners Permian LLC et al. v. MRC Permian Company).
Lessee (MRC) invokes the force majeure provision of an oil and gas lease, asserting that...more
5/10/2023
/ Civil Conspiracy ,
Constructive Trusts ,
Force Majeure Clause ,
Mineral Exploration ,
Mineral Extraction ,
Mineral Leases ,
Mineral Rights ,
Oil & Gas ,
Repudiation ,
Tortious Interference ,
Trespass ,
Well Drilling
Golden Eagle Resources II LLC v. Rice Drilling D LLC. presents a small step in the development of subsurface trespass law in Ohio. The federal court considered a motion to dismiss, in which it evaluated the sufficiency of the...more
In a recurring theme, harmony and the four-corners rule were front and center in Citation 2002 Inv. LLC et al v. Occidental Permian, Ltd. et al, a case of competing claims over the granting language in an assignment of oil...more
Texas courts continue to address the “fixed or floating” non-participating royalty interest question. The El Paso Court of Appeals’ answer in Bridges v. Uhl et al. was floating, based on the language in that particular...more