As a key component of most batteries, lithium is ubiquitous in our daily lives. From the moment your alarm on your cell phone goes off in the morning, to using your battery-powered toothbrush, to reading this blog post on your laptop or tablet, lithium makes it all work. Thus, it shouldn’t surprise you to hear
In Lexington Land Development, L.L.C. v. Chevron Pipelines Company, et al., 2020-0622 (La. App. 1 Cir. 5/25/21), 2021 WL 2102932, —So. 3d—, the Louisiana First Circuit recently reaffirmed well-settled principles regarding prescription and the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana legacy cases.
Continue Reading Louisiana First Circuit Reaffirms Prescription and Subsequent Purchaser Principles
In 2003, the Louisiana Supreme Court rendered its landmark decision in Corbello, et al. v. Iowa Production, et al. Since then, Louisiana courts have seen a steady stream of “legacy litigation” claims being filed. Legacy litigation claims generally concern alleged contamination arising from historic oil and gas operations under theories of both breach of
In January of this year, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania tackled an issue that has been confronted by few other courts—whether the rule of capture precludes a claim for subsurface trespass due to hydraulic fracturing.[1]
The impacts of COVID-19 have rapidly swept across the country and the globe. Coupled with the recent decline in oil and gas prices, many operators are left scrambling in an attempt to navigate unprecedented circumstances. With shutdowns and stay-at-home orders in place and regulatory deadlines looming, Louisiana operators are looking for guidance from regulators on how to proceed.
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”) approving a plan “to evaluate or remediate” the environmental damage. La. R.S. 30:29(C)(2)(a). Thereafter the trial court “shall adopt the plan approved by the [DNR] unless another party proves by a preponderance of the evidence that another plan is more feasible,” id. 30:29(C)(5).
Continue Reading Third Circuit Affirms Trial Court’s Refusal to Adopt DNR’s Most Feasible Plan in Sweet Lake Land & Oil Co. v. Oleum Operating Company
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 to provide a recordable act evidencing the expiration of a mineral lease under Mineral Code articles 206-209 and (2) failure to pay royalties under Mineral Code articles 137-140.[2]
Continue Reading Louisiana Second Circuit Finds Holder of Mortgage Encumbering a Mineral Lease Solidarily Liable with Mineral Lessees for Damages Under the Louisiana Mineral Code
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 2004 mineral lease covering nearly 1,400 acres in Sections 9, 10, 15, 16, and 21, Township 15 North, Range 15 West, in Caddo Parish.[2] The lease was granted by Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. (“Gloria’s Ranch”) to Tauren Exploration, Inc. (“Tauren”) and contained a three year primary term as well as a horizontal and vertical Pugh clause.[3] Tauren subsequently assigned a 49% interest in the lease to Cubic Energy, Inc. (“Cubic”).[4]
Continue Reading Louisiana Second Circuit Provides Clarity on Production in Paying Quantities and Affirms Lease Cancellation Under Mineral Code Article 140 for Failure to Pay Royalties
Since this blog’s post on production in paying quantities on January 26, 2016, the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal rendered its latest decision on the subject in Middleton v. EP Energy E&P Co., L.P., 50,300-CA (La. App. 2d Cir. 2/3/16). While not particularly groundbreaking, Middleton does provide further guidance to mineral lessees
The sharp decline in oil prices over the past year and a half has had a significant impact on operators and mineral lessees in Louisiana and in other oil-producing states. Mineral lessees may be particularly concerned with whether recent production levels have maintained their leases beyond their primary terms.
In Louisiana, as in most jurisdictions