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
This particular species of lease washouts is based on two recent cases from the El Paso Court of Appeals – Cimarex Energy Co. Anadarko E & P Onshore, LLC, 676 S.W.3d Anadarko E& P Onshore, LLC, no. Cimarex instead chose to rely on production from several wells Anadarko drilled in 2011 and 2012.
Vertice management said that the acquisition enhances Vertices’ ability “to support wireline service providers and E&P companies with innovative tools and integrated solutions, and broadens its presence across unconventional oil and gas markets.” They do cased hole work, both vertical and horizontal production.
El Paso E & P Co. , El Paso E & P Co. , In that case, the plaintiff-lessors argued, the lease should be rescinded based on their error. Alyce Gaines Johnson Special Trust v. 2d 640, 641-43 (W.D. 9/22/10); 48 So. 3d 341, 342-43. Communications include firm news, insights, and events.
The Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week in a case that could substantially clarify, or even fundamentally reshape, the characterization and ownership of underground storage rights in Texas. The case was Myers-Woodward v. The case remains pending before the Texas Supreme Court on petition for review.
By Robert E. See Lesley Foxhall Pietras , Air Permitting: Sixth Circuit Vacates Single Stationary Source Aggregation Determination for E&P Facilities Due to EPA’s Unreasonable Interpretation of Adjacent , The Energy Law Blog, Aug. Holden and Carlos J. 7412 (n)(4)(A).Section 7412(n)(4) (emphasis added); see also 40 C.F.R.
Anadarko E&P Onshore, LLC, 520 S.W.3d 2011), stating "Texas law establishes that the holder of a mineral estate has the right to exploit minerals, but does not own the subsurface mass." West, 508 S.W.2d 2d 812, 815 (Tex. " • In Lightning Oil Co. 3d 39, 49 (Tex. Swift Energy Operating, LLC, 622 S.W.3d
P N K (Lake Charles) L.L.C., But in so doing, the court may have announced a new jurisdictional test with significant ramifications for future cases. So, the question on appeal was whether this was the “exceptional case” where personal jurisdiction could also be exercised in another state. 915 (2011). [3] Brown , 564 U.S.
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