Texas Supreme Court decides Superior Snubbing - upholds effect of indemnity provisions in Master Service Agreement

By Andrew Wooley:

Supreme Court of Texas decides Superior Snubbing: In a case of substantial importance to the energy industry, the Supreme Court of Texas held that an oilfield service contractor sued by an injured employee of another contractor is entitled to enforce the indemnity provision in a Master Service Agreement between the operator and the contractor whose employee was injured.

Continue Reading...

Louisiana Extends Abandonment Period For Litigation Affected by Katrina or Rita

By Joe Giarrusso

In Louisiana, a lawsuit is generally deemed abandoned when the parties fail to take any step in its prosecution for three years.  This rule is operative without any formal order.  La. Code Civ. P. art 561.  However, Act 361 of 2007 extended the period for abandonment to five years where (1) the action was initiated prior to August 26, 2005, and was not previously declared abandoned under the general three year period, and (2) the party proves that the failure to take a step in the prosecution or defense of the suit was caused by or was a direct result of Hurricanes Katrina or Rita.  The revision became effective July 9, 2007.   Click here to read the Act.

Latest EIA Report - product prices and pipeline news

Since Wednesday, August 15, all prices reported in the weekly chart (for both natural gas and crude oil) have decreased as Hurricane Dean failed to have a significant impact on domestic production in the Gulf of Mexico, and temperatures moderated demand.  Natural gas volumes in storage continue to increase.

Commodity

Price or Volumes

Change since last

% Change

Natural Gas Spot (Henry Hub)

$5.840/MMBtu

DOWN            $1.46

20.0%

NYMEX (September deliveries)

$5.578/MMBtu

DOWN            $1.286

18.7%

Natural Gas in Storage

2,926 Bcf

UP                      23 Bcf

12.8%

West Texas Intermediate Spot

$69.30/Bbl

DOWN            $4.06

5.5%

The EIA also reports that:

  • Northwest Pipeline Company announced that effective gas day August 22, and until further notice, injection requests for interruptible storage capacity at the Jackson Prairie storage facility in Washington State will not be accepted. Furthermore, all interruptible storage holders that have a balance in the storage facility must bring their storage balance to zero by September 7, 2007. Park and loan service remains available on a limited basis at the Jackson Prairie facility.
  • Questar Pipeline Company announced that it will be performing piping modifications between September 18 and 19, 2007, as part of the Southern System Expansion II project. To facilitate the work, Mainline 40 will be taken out of service from the Fidlar Station in Utah to the Green River block valve, located 24 miles west of Fidlar. In all, the pipeline plans on shutting in 18 points and reducing nominations to zero during the modifications. In addition, the Mainline 40 capacity will be reduced to about 330,000 decatherms per day for the 2 days. Nominations are expected to return to normal for gas day September 20.
  • Dominion Gas Transmission Company took the Smithburg station in Virginia out of service between August 22 and 23 for work related to a planned expansion of the station. During the outage, producer compression in bubble 4403 was shut in.
  • Southern Natural Gas Company announced that it has experienced an unscheduled outage at the DeArmanville compressor station located on the north system in eastern Alabama. As a result of this outage, Southern may be required to limit interruptible capacity in Group 4 – Chattanooga Group, Group 13 – East Tennessee Group, and Group 59 – Tallapoosa Group and/or limit deliveries to 6 percent hourly entitlement rights. The limitation of interruptible capacity is supposed to remain in place until further notice

As reported by the Energy Information Agency

Fifth Circuit Considers Conditional Consent Issue in Cedyco v. Petroquest

By Anna Knull:

In Cedyco Corp. v. Petroquest Energy LLC, No. 05-20493, the Fifth Circuit considered claims for breach of contract and specific performance brought under Texas law and arising from the sale of the working interest in two Louisiana oil wells at auction. The wells were sold under the condition that PetroQuest would not sell or assign the mineral rights without first obtaining the written consent of Exxon, from whom PetroQuest had subleased the interest. Exxon granted consent conditioned on PetroQuest remaining obligated for the original sublease and indemnifying Exxon for any liability arising from Ceydco's operation of the lease. PetroQuest refused to complete the sale to Ceydco under these terms, and Ceydco sued PetroQuest for breach of the contract for sale and specific performance. In reversing summary judgment in favor of Ceydco, the Fifth Circuit held that though a contract for the sale of the wells had been formed, the contract contained a condition precedent that Exxon consent to the assignment. Because PetroQuest was not obligated to accept Exxon's terms, Exxon's conditional consent was not consent under the contract; consequently, PetroQuest's obligation to perform under the contract never came due.

MMS' Offshore Texas Lease Sale Successful

MMS's August 22, 2007 Western Gulf of Mexico lease sale offered 3,338 tracts, or approximately 18 million acres, offshore Texas.  Forty-seven companies participated, submitting 358 bids on 282 tracts.  The total of all bids received was $369,496,840.  MMS Director Randall Luthi observed that “the success of this lease sale once again demonstrates industry’s commitment and interest in the Gulf.” For more information, click here.

Tags:

Fifth Circuit Rejects Takings Claim

In Haspel & Davis Milling & Planting Co., Ltd. v. Board of Commissioners of the Orleans Levee District, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs on a takings claim.  In 1984, the Louisiana Legislature ordered the Levee Board to return land expropriated to build the Bohemia Spillway to its former owners and to provide them with an accounting of all revenues received from the property.   After the Levee Board failed to pay the landowners the mineral royalties that it had received on the affected property, the plaintiffs sued, arguing that the Levee Board's continued collection of and failure to return royalties was an unconstitutional taking.  After 12 years of litigation, the parties entered a settlement agreement that provided that the Levee Board would pay one lump sum to plaintiffs and then pay further as money was appropriated for that purpose.  After the Levee Board failed to pay further, the plaintiffs filed suit in federal court in June 2006, arguing that the Levee Board's failure to pay the terms of the settlement agreement was an unconstitutional taking.   The district court agreed.  The Fifth Circuit reversed, holding that because the landowners entered a "Settlement Agreement, the landowners compromised their takings claim against the Levee Board, and thus, extinguished any takings claim they may have had."  Therefore, "the landowners' only recourse is to enforce their rights under the Settlement Agreement and Consent Judgment."  To read the full opinion, click here

OPA Does Not Preclude State Law Claims for Additional Compensation

By Drew Spaniol

The Eastern District of Louisiana recently held that the Oil Pollution Liability and Compensation Act (OPA), 33 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq., does not preclude a plaintiff from bringing state law claims for additional liability or compensation.  Isla Corp. v. Sundown Energy, LP, 2007 WL 1240212 (E.D. La. 4/27/07).  The case concerned oil tanks on a drill site owned and operated by Sundown, which were ruptured in Hurricane Katrina. The plaintiffs asserted claims under both OPA and state law.  Seeking to avoid the additional liability of the state law claims, Sundown argued in a motion to dismiss that OPA provided plaintiffs’ exclusive remedy. The court held, however, that while OPA provides the sole federal remedy for oil pollution claims, OPA expressly allows states to provide for "any additional liability or requirements with respect to the discharge of oil or other pollution by oil within such state."  Because of this provision, the court denied Sundown's motion to dismiss and allowed plaintiff's state law claims to go forward. 

Louisiana Operators Are Not Responsible For Making Non-Participants' Royalty Payments Before Payout

By Dana Douglas

The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal recently held that an operator is not responsible for payment of a non-operator's royalties and overriding royalties before payout.  In Gulf Explorer, LLC v. Clayton WIlliams Energy Inc., 2007 WL 1651090 (La. App. 1st Cir. 6/8/07), the operator completed a well that was plugged and abandoned without reaching payout.  A non-participating working interest owner sued, asking the court to declare that its royalty and overriding royalty owners were entitled to their share of production.  Louisiana Revised Statute 30:10 provides that the party drilling a well can recover a non-participant's share of expenses from production, but also provides that royalty and overriding royalty owners shall receive the portion of production due them.  The court held that, because La. R.S. 30:10 allows the drilling party to recover from the tract, while royalty obligations arise from a lease, the operator had no obligation to pay royalties before it recouped its expenses from production.  Thus, the non-participant was responsible for payment of its royalty and overriding royalty payments.