While oil and gas company-defendants—and several courts alike—have deemed the applicability of the subsequent purchaser doctrine to mineral leases a settled issue of law, plaintiff-landowners have continued to argue otherwise. In a unanimous opinion issued July 18, 2018 in Grace Ranch, LLC v. BP America Production Company, et al., the Third Circuit not only provides … Continue Reading
On or about May 23, 2018, several Defendants in the Coastal Zone Management Act (“CZMA”) Litigation filed Notices of Removal in 42 lawsuits filed against 212 oil and gas companies by six different parishes (Plaquemines, Jefferson, Cameron, Vermilion, St. Bernard, and St. John the Baptist), removing the cases to federal court. The timing of the … Continue Reading
The Louisiana Supreme Court’s reversal of Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. v. Tauren Exploration, Inc., hands a victory to financiers of oil and gas operations and settles a long-running controversy over the amount of damages available for failure to pay mineral royalties. The Gloria’s Ranch trial court held two mineral lessees and a mortgagee (Wells Fargo) solidarily liable … Continue Reading
In a decision issued today, the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal issued the first appellate court opinion addressing the procedure for approval of settlements in cases governed by Act 312 (La. R.S. 30:29). Britt v. Riceland Petroleum Corp., is a “legacy” lawsuit in which landowners sued Riceland Petroleum Company and BP America Production Company—the … Continue Reading
In a decision announced this week, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality and method of compensation for the expropriation by a governmental body of property owned by an ongoing commercial venture. In St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District v. Violet Dock Port, Inc., LLC, the St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District … Continue Reading
On Friday, December 15, the Louisiana Supreme Court granted three separate writ applications filed by each of the defendants in Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. v. Tauren Exploration, Inc. These applications sought review of the Louisiana Second Circuit’s June 2, 2017 decision affirming the trial court’s ruling that Wells Fargo, a mortgage lender with a security interest in a … Continue Reading
The Louisiana Legislature passed “Act 312,” La. R.S. 30:29, in 2006 to provide a procedure for ensuring that amounts awarded to remediate environmental damage are actually spent on remediation. Act 312 sets forth a multi-step scheme that is triggered once a party is found responsible for environmental damage, culminating with Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) … Continue Reading
The White House has announced the nominees to fill four vacant seats on the U.S. Fifth Circuit and two seats in the Eastern District of Louisiana.… Continue Reading
In Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. v. Tauren Exploration, Inc., the Louisiana Second Circuit upheld a trial court’s ruling that Wells Fargo, a mortgage lender with a security interest in a mineral lease, was solidarily liable with its borrowers (the mineral lessees) for a breach of the mineral lessees’ contractual and statutory obligations to produce in paying … Continue Reading
A July 3, 2017 ruling from the 17th Judicial District establishes that a mineral servitude owner’s obligation under Mineral Code article 22 “to restore the surface to its original condition” means the condition of the property at the creation of the servitude—and not the property’s pristine, pre-operation condition. The court’s commonsense ruling in Sterling Sugars … Continue Reading
In Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. v. Tauren Exploration, Inc., the Louisiana Second Circuit upheld a trial court’s ruling that the holder of a security interest in mineral leases was solidarily liable for damages under the Louisiana Mineral Code stemming from its mineral lessees/mortgagors’ actions.[1] In the case, a landowner sued its mineral lessees for: (1) failure … Continue Reading
On June 2, 2017 the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s judgment cancelling a mineral lease under Mineral Code article 140 and provided further clarity on a production in paying quantities analysis under Louisiana Mineral Code article 124.[1] The dispute in Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. v. Tauren Exploration, Inc., arose from a … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
In Gladney v. Anglo-Dutch Energy, L.L.C., the Third Circuit addressed the question of whether or not a mineral lessee must pay its lessor full lease-basis royalties for production undertaken during the effective period of a conditional allowable but prior to the effective date of a unit order.[1] In the case, the Plaintiffs granted a mineral … Continue Reading
La. R.S. 30:103.1 requires operators or producers of oil and gas units created by the Louisiana Commissioner of Conservation to provide reports containing information related to well costs and production to owners of “unleased oil and gas interests” (referred to herein as “103.1 report(s)”). If an operator does not provide the information required under the … Continue Reading
