In Justiss Oil Company, Inc. v. Oil Country Tubular Corp., et al, the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal joined its sister circuit –the Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal, in finding that La. Civ. Code art. 2323 applies only to actions sounding in tort – not to actions in contract, such as redhibition.  In doing so, the Third Circuit created an issue ripe for Louisiana Supreme Court decision.
Continue Reading Casing Controversy: Does the Comparative Fault Codal Article Cover Contract Claims?

The United States Supreme Court, in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell (May 30, 2017), declined to allow a personal injury plaintiff to sue a railroad company in a state in which the railroad does business but is not incorporated or headquartered.  In BNSF Railway Co., two plaintiffs brought suit for injuries in Montana “although the injured workers did not reside in Montana, nor were they injured there.”  The plaintiffs claimed that the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”), which allows railroad workers to sue their employers for personal injuries, created a jurisdictional exception to recent cases that held that a corporation may be sued only in a state that has a connection to the injury or in the state in which the corporation is incorporated or maintains its headquarters, absent exceptional circumstances. 
Continue Reading United States Supreme Court Limits Forums Available to Railroad Workers

John Bradford’s article “Tax Planning for Oil and Gas Joint Operations”, originally prepared for the Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation’s 2016 Special Institute on Joint Operations and the New AAPL Form 610-2015 Model Form Joint Operating Agreement, has been selected for publication by the University of North Texas Institute of Petroleum Accounting in its Petroleum Accounting and Financial Management Journal.  Part 1 of the article appears in the 2017 Spring, volume 36, no. 1 edition, while part 2 will follow in the 2017 Summer edition.
Continue Reading A Key Resource For Structuring Oil & Gas Joint Operations

In Guilbeau v. Hess Corporation, the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the application of Louisiana’s subsequent purchaser doctrine to bar a plaintiff’s claims for property damage resulting from alleged oilfield contamination that occurred prior to his purchase of the property.  The court specifically rejected the plaintiff’s attempt to characterize the multitude of relevant Louisiana appellate court rulings as a “mishmash of appellate jurisprudence,” noting instead that “a clear consensus has emerged among all Louisiana appellate courts that have considered the issue.”
Continue Reading U.S. Fifth Circuit Affirms Application of the Subsequent Purchaser Doctrine in Oilfield Contamination Case, Recognizes “Clear Consensus” Among Louisiana Appellate Courts, and Declines Certification to the Louisiana Supreme Court

On April 4, 2017, a federal district court dismissed a citizen-enforcement action under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act that could have profound impact on fracking suits against the oil and gas industry.

In Sierra Club v. Chesapeke Operating, LLC, the Sierra Club alleged that the deep injection of liquid waste from oil and gas activities has caused an increase in the number and severity of earthquakes in Oklahoma.  To address this alleged harm, the Sierra Club sought several forms of injunctive relief, including reduction of waste disposal activities, reinforcement of structures vulnerable to earthquakes, and the establishment of an independent earthquake monitoring center.

Defendants Chesapeake Operating, LLC, Devon Energy Production Co., LP, and New Dominion, LLC moved to dismiss the case on several grounds.  The court granted the motions on two of these grounds, finding that the issues raised by Sierra Club are best addressed at the state administrative level.
Continue Reading Leave It to the States: Oklahoma Federal Court Dismisses Fracking Suit In Favor Of Administrative Regulation

Professor Jim Rossi’s lecture on “Federalism Battles in Energy Transportation,” specifically whether the federal or state government is the proper authority to exercise its eminent domain and regulatory power.

Continue Reading A Summary of Professor Jim Rossi’s Lecture on the “Federalism Battles in Energy Transportation”

In Petro-Chem Operating Co., Inc. v. Flat River Farms, L.L.C., the Louisiana Second Circuit addressed issues affecting the creation and preservation of mineral servitudes and payment of court costs in a concursus action.[1] In the case, an operator initiated a concursus action seeking to resolve ownership interest in minerals underlying property on which it was operating. The dispute as to ownership arose because of questions as to: (1) whether or not a notarial act of correction could be used to perfect a mineral reservation in agreements that did not initially include language effecting such a reservation[2] and (2) whether or not inclement weather or the failure to timely obtain a permit could serve as obstacles sufficient to suspend the prescription of nonuse from running against a mineral servitude under Louisiana Mineral Code article 59.[3]
Continue Reading Louisiana Second Circuit Addresses: (1) Creation of Mineral Servitudes Via Notarial Acts of Correction; (2) Obstacles Suspending the Prescription of Nonuse from Running Against Mineral Servitudes; and (3) Payment of Court Costs in Concursus Actions

On March 24, 2017, the Louisiana Supreme Court declined to consider the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in XXI Oil & Gas v. Hilcorp.[1] The Third Circuit’s decision involved the interpretation of Louisiana’s well cost reporting regime under La. R.S. 30:103.1-103.2 (collectively referred to herein as “the Statutes”) with respect to: (1) the parties entitled to receive reporting under La. R.S. 30:103.1 and (2) the scope of penalties under La. R.S. 30:103.2 that may be imposed against a unit operator, who fails to provide sufficient well cost reports.[2] For now at least, the Court’s decision to deny writs in XXI Oil & Gas effectively leaves unit operators subject to increased reporting obligations under La. R.S. 30:103.1 and more expansive penalties under La. R.S. 30:103.2 in situations where they fail to provide adequate reporting.[3]
Continue Reading Louisiana Supreme Court Denies Writ Application in XXI Oil & Gas v. Hilcorp

The U.S. Fifth Circuit recently dismissed a sweeping environmental lawsuit filed by a Louisiana Levee Board against 97 oil and gas companies alleging coastal land loss. Read our case summary.
Continue Reading U.S. Fifth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Levee Board’s Lawsuit Against 97 Oil and Gas Companies