This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The “ LL&E II ” decision finds that Act 312 charges the court, not the jury, to determine the funding needed to remediate property to government standards. 3d — (“ LL&E II ”). [1]. Background of Legacy Litigation and LL&E I . In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. LL&E II , at *2.
In 2006, a group of landowners filed a class action lawsuit against the State of Louisiana through the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources (“LDNR”) concerning the ownership of riverbanks in the Catahoula Basin. State of Louisiana through the Department of Natural Resources , 22-0625 (La. 1/1/23), So.
The petitioners in the 2006 proceeding stated that they believed it was necessary for the succession to hire counsel to investigate and litigate these claims. The Succession of Mayo Romero. The Succession of Mayo Romero. A copy of the Third Circuit’s decision can be found here. and Texaco, Inc. before the trial and appellate courts.
2022-Ohio-901 , a consolidation of two cases previously decided by the Seventh District Court of Appeals, followed in the footsteps laid before it in its earlier decision in Gerrity v. E), they did not search the public records of the county where the holder was said to have resided. The Court’s decision in Fonzi v.
The “ LL&E II ” decision finds that Act 312 charges the court, not the jury, to determine the funding needed to remediate property to government standards. 3d — (“ LL&E II ”). [1]. Background of Legacy Litigation and LL&E I . In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. LL&E II , at *2.
The petitioners in the 2006 proceeding stated that they believed it was necessary for the succession to hire counsel to investigate and litigate these claims. The Succession of Mayo Romero. . The Succession of Mayo Romero. . A copy of the Third Circuit’s decision can be found here. and Texaco, Inc. before the trial and appellate courts.
United States , Case No. United States , Case No. As detailed in our prior Sackett blog article , CWA jurisdictional decisions have been plagued by administrative rulings, guidance, and court opinions that attempted to implement the plurality opinion in the Supreme Court’s 2006 Rapanos v. In Lewis v.
Moreno and Robert E. Thus, under the 2006 regulations, stormwater from Oil &Gas sites that only contained sediment was always exempt from permitting. The 2006 regulations were judicially challenged and eventually vacated. Alternatively, in some cases, individual permits may be needed. By Carlos J. CWA §402(l)(2).
By Robert E. 2208 (2006). In 2006, the Supreme Court decided two consolidated cases involving the Corps’ authority to require dredge and fill permits under CWA § 404 for discharge into wetlands having only indirect connections to navigable waters. 2208 (2006). United States , 126 S. United States , and Carabell v.
In January 2006, approximately 6 months before the servitude would expire for non-use, the mineral servitude owner conveyed the servitude to an affiliated business entity on the condition that it drill a well on the property by June 15, 2006. A well was spud on March 28, 2006.
The judgment is the latest in a suit the EPA filed against CITGO under the Clean Water Act for a 2006 spill at the oil company’s St. In January 2016, Judge Haik retired from the bench and the case was transferred to Judge Drell. In January 2016, Judge Haik retired from the bench and the case was transferred to Judge Drell.
In a stark reminder of the sanctity of Coast Guard investigations, and the consequences of impeding such investigations, the U.S. On October 20, 2017, Bouchard Transportation’s ATB BUSTER BOUCHARD/B. 255 suffered an explosion and fire while transporting roughly 2,000 barrels of oil off Port Aransas, Texas. 2114) (the “SPA”). 3d 424 , 444 (7th Cir.
While the Court is no stranger to interpreting (and often muddling) the familiar royalty clause interpretation questions surrounding the first issue, in a case of first impression, the Court also analyzed the breadth of a lease’s free-use clause. If not superseded, BlueStone would be permitted to deduct post-production costs.
While the Court is no stranger to interpreting (and often muddling) the familiar royalty clause interpretation questions surrounding the first issue, in a case of first impression, the Court also analyzed the breadth of a lease’s free-use clause. If not superseded, BlueStone would be permitted to deduct post-production costs.
While the Court is no stranger to interpreting (and often muddling) the familiar royalty clause interpretation questions surrounding the first issue, in a case of first impression, the Court also analyzed the breadth of a lease’s free-use clause. Factual and Procedural Background. Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co., 3d 198, 211 (Tex.
The tables turned again at the Texas Supreme Court, which ultimately held that the boundary stipulation was valid and that the defendants conclusively established their ratification defense, but the case is still ongoing. Bringing to mind the infamous Hatfield-McCoy family feud, Concho Resources, Inc. See 2021 WL 1432222 (Tex.
The tables turned again at the Texas Supreme Court, which ultimately held that the boundary stipulation was valid and that the defendants conclusively established their ratification defense, but the case is still ongoing. Bringing to mind the infamous Hatfield-McCoy family feud, Concho Resources, Inc. See 2021 WL 1432222 (Tex.
ACT 312 BEFORE THE NEW LEGISLATION Act 312 of the 2006 legislative session was enacted in response to judicial decisions that awarded significant damages for remediation costs with no obligation for landowners to actually use such awards for cleanup work. These changes are summarized below. The legislature responded by enacting Act 312.
715 (2006), which was issued 17 years ago but was not uniformly applied due to Justice Kennedy’s use of the “significant nexus” test in his concurrence. Brief Overview of “Waters of the United States” The Supreme Court previously considered the scope of “waters of the United States” under the CWA in 2006 in Rapanos.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content