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
To scale impact in the agentic era, organizations must reset their AI transformation approaches from scattered initiatives to strategic programs; from use cases to business processes; from siloed AI teams to cross-functional transformation squads; and from experimentation to industrialized, scalable delivery.
Together, these developments will undoubtedly lead to more litigation and a higher cost of doing business on the Outer Continental Shelf. The number of civil penalty cases has risen gradually since 2009, with a sharp increase over 2013-2015. In 2013, the average penalty was $67,714 over 42 cases.
09-0579, 2009 WL 3735798 (W.D. 6, 2009), the Western District of Louisiana remanded a case seeking rescission of a mineral lease back to state court after the defendant failed to provide proof of the amount in controversy, namely the total value of the lease. Hinnigan In Sullivan v. Chesapeake Louisiana, L.P.,
17, 2009), addresses when mandamus relief is available in connection with an order compelling arbitration. In this case, several working interest owners sued Great Western Drilling, their operator, claiming an opportunity to participate in wells drilled by Great Western. 07-0055 (Tex.
The subsequent purchaser doctrine has been litigated extensively in Louisiana legacy cases involving claims for oilfield remediation. In 2009, several of the Bailey family members formed New 90, LLC to manage this and other family-owned property. The trial court agreed and dismissed all of New 90’s claims.
This particular species of lease washouts is based on two recent cases from the El Paso Court of Appeals – Cimarex Energy Co. Cimarex Energy Company (“Cimarex”) obtained a lease in December 2009 of an undivided 1/6th of the minerals in 440 acres located in Ward County, Texas. In a similar case, Cromwell v.
Summers April 3, 2009. They are also available on Westlaw at 2009 WL 884906. By Andrew Wooley: The Supreme Court of Texas issued a decision on rehearing in Entergy Gulf States, Inc. The court’s holding, however, did not change. We reverse the court of appeals’ judgment and render judgment for Entergy.
The results also suggest that there may be a substantial increase in our base case recoverable resources which could add tremendous value to the project over time. The evaluation confirms that theCane Creekreservoir is highly productive and potentially ranks alongside some of the most productive oil and gas plays in theU.S.
The chart below depicts Haynesville shale dry natural gas production averages from January 2009 to August 2018 in billion cubic feet per day. The first began in early 2009 with average daily Haynesville production surpassing 1 billion cubic feet per day for the first time in June of that year. 9/22/10); 48 So. 3d 341, 342-43.
In October 2009, new EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson announced that EPA would reconsider and accept public comment on the Johnson memorandum. However, pollutants such as carbon dioxide, for which EPA regulations only require monitoring and reporting, are not subject to PSD permitting.
By Marie Carlisle On May 28, 2009, the Fifth Circuit decided In the Matter of: Lease Oil Antitrust Litigation, case no. 08-40230, reversing the District Court’s denial of the State of Texas’ motion to intervene in a matter concerning unclaimed settlement money from the oil antitrust action.
6] On September 1, 2009, Gloria’s Ranch executed a top lease to Chesapeake on the property in Section 21. [7] 7] In November of 2009, Tauren assigned the deep rights (all depths below the base of the Cotton Valley formation) to EXCO USA Asset, Inc. for the 18 month period prior to Gloria’s Ranch’s letter in December of 2009. [19]
By Bob Holden and Jillian Marullo On April 23, 2013, in a case of first impression, the D.C. In 2009, the EPA requested that the Corps revoke or modify the Mingo permit, but the Corps refused, finding no factors present requiring modification. The EPA then initiated its veto process through notice and comment action.
In this case, Tongli Shipping Pte. 2009) (explaining that a valid prima facie claim must be “facially sound”). Property is defined broadly and includes traditional maritime assets, but also other tangible and intangible assets, including bank accounts, accounts receivable, and debts. Shivsu Canadian Clear Waters Tech. (P) 649 F.Supp.2d
The Fifth Circuit agreed with the lower court that state statutes and case law characterize SRA-L as an arm of the state; but caveated that the factor was restricted and “given the inconsistent descriptions in the same statutes and the lack of a more-definite characterization in either statute or case law.” [7] Caremark, Inc.,
404 (2009). Instead, according to the Ninth Circuit, the references to nonpecuniary damages in Miles had been given too much weight when the case itself really concerned the specific availability of loss of society damages (a type of nonpecuniary remedy with its own storied and arcane history). Sounding Co. Townsend, 557 U.S.
14-07-0069-CV, 2009 WL 442003 at *1 (Tex. Houston [14th] 2009, no pet. By Kevin Connolly On an issue of apparent national first impression, the Houston Court of Appeals, in XTO Energy Inc. Smith Production Inc., Rather, a receiving party has only thirty days to notify the proposing party of its election.
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] Tauren Exploration, Inc. , 4] $242,029.26 6] $936,803.00 Rhymes ( jdrhymes@liskow.com ).
Sometimes this is the case, but not always.And have there been enough 2.0 Proceed at your own risk! mile, to 1.5 mile, to 2.0 mile laterals, but the current development plan is for 2.0 mile wells, then the anticipated or targeted improvement in recovery would be 33.3% (assuming no other changes).Sometimes
The supreme court requested briefs on the merits, granted the petition for review, and in October 2009 heard the parties’ oral arguments in the case. Justice Hecht authored the opinion for a unanimous court and Chief Justice Jefferson wrote a three-paragraph concurring opinion not directed to the merits of the case.
1] In the case, the Plaintiffs granted a mineral lease to the Defendant-Lessee that provided for a 1/5 royalty in 2009. [2] Anglo-Dutch Energy, L.L.C. , 2] The Defendant-Lessee drilled a gas well on the leased premises on February 14, 2012. [3] 10] The trial court accepted the Defendant-Lessee’s argument. [11]
of natural gas in future cases. University of Georgia, 2009. After all, “post-production costs” is a term of art in the oil and gas industry, and it generally refers to “costs associated with making natural gas marketable after gas is severed or removed from the ground” such as costs for transportation, gathering, and treating, etc. [12]
University of Georgia, 2009. 2, unit operators should exercise caution in situations where a non-operating working interest owner with mineral leases in a Commissioner’s unit requests 103.1 Associate, Liskow & Lewis, B.A., Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State University, 2012. [1] 1] See TDX Energy, LLC v. Chesapeake Operating, Inc.,
3d—, the Louisiana First Circuit recently reaffirmed well-settled principles regarding prescription and the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana legacy cases. In this case, Lexington Land sued Chevron U.S.A., Exxon Mobil Corporation , 2009-2368 (La. This opinion reinforces several key concepts in legacy cases.
3d—, the Louisiana First Circuit recently reaffirmed well-settled principles regarding prescription and the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana legacy cases. In this case, Lexington Land sued Chevron U.S.A., Exxon Mobil Corporation , 2009-2368 (La. This opinion reinforces several key concepts in legacy cases.
3d—, the Louisiana First Circuit recently reaffirmed well-settled principles regarding prescription and the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana legacy cases. In this case, Lexington Land sued Chevron U.S.A., Exxon Mobil Corporation , 2009-2368 (La. This opinion reinforces several key concepts in legacy cases.
Shortly after the consolidation motion was granted, Mobil Oil (who was a named defendant in Bottley , not Lester ) removed both cases under CAFA, arguing that the consolidation of Bottley and Lester constituted a newly commenced “mass action.” Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana, Case No. 13-6222, Div.
Myanmar Californians are accustomed to conversations about seismically resilient construction, but the same isnt the case in some parts of Asia. Suwansawat says the 33-story, under-construction building that collapsed shouldn’t have. Some engineers are calling for further upgrades and oversight.
1] In the case, an operator initiated a concursus action seeking to resolve ownership interest in minerals underlying property on which it was operating. University of Georgia, 2009. Flat River Farms, L.L.C. , which governs notarial acts of correction: A. (1) b) The notary who actually prepared the act containing the error. [13]
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