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
3d 544 (2024) , the Texas Supreme Court addressed a case where the Plaintiff claimed that two leases had terminated because a shut in royalty payment was made late. The leases in question had a pretty standard shut in royalty clause that allowed a payment of $50.00 Production on the only well ceased in September 2017.
In a straightforward application of Louisiana’s prescriptive principles, the Louisiana Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit affirmed the trial court’s grant of exceptions of prescription, finding plaintiff’s claims for fraud, under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act (LUTPA), and for unpaid royalties all prescribed in Karen May v.
Background and Lease Terms In this case ( Scout Energy Mgmt., 31, 2024]), the Texas Supreme Court held that vague notations on shut-in royalty check receipts cannot modify an unambiguous lease provision regarding the timing and effect of shut-in payments. Taylor Properties , No. 23-1014, 2024 WL 5249490 [Tex.
In a straightforward application of Louisiana’s prescriptive principles, the Louisiana Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit affirmed the trial court’s grant of exceptions of prescription, finding plaintiff’s claims for fraud, under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act (LUTPA), and for unpaid royalties all prescribed in Karen May v.
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.
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] 1] The dispute in Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. Tauren Exploration, Inc.
the El Paso Court of Appeals reversed a trial court's summary judgment and held that post-closing "corrections" to overriding royalty assignments were invalid and unenforceable against a subsequent purchaser. Callon acquired and recorded its ownership interest in August 2017. —El Paso Jan. 28, 2025, no pet.
May 16, 2025), the Texas Supreme Court resolved two significant issues affecting mineral owners and surface owners: (1) who owns the empty caverns created by salt mining operations, and (2) how to calculate royalty payments on produced salt. Despite this substantial production, USM did not pay Myers any royalty. Can a Cavern Be Owned?
The defendants will have until September 7, 2017 to seek a writ from the Louisiana Supreme Court. Tauren Exploration, Inc. , A detailed summary of that decision is available here. On August 7, in a 3-2 decision, a panel of five Second Circuit judges denied the defendants’ application for rehearing. Chief Judge Henry Brown, Jr.,
The second major increase began in early 2017 and continues through today. for a one-fourth (1/4) mineral royalty and as much as ten thousand ($10,000) dollars per acre bonus royalty.” In that case, the plaintiff-lessors argued, the lease should be rescinded based on their error. 9/22/10); 48 So. 3d 341, 342-43.
Recently, the Nigerian government demanded more than $60 billion in back royalties under a production sharing agreement with the supermajors operating in the country. Still, in 2017 it changed tack and decided to legalise the facilities instead, bringing what many see as a flourishing business in fuel-starved Nigeria to the light.
There are cases where the tumor is causing HI by creating a non-insulin substance (Diazoxide works by stopping insulin production so if that’s not the problem, the drug doesn’t do much). They entered into the agreement in December 2017. Diazoxide and glucocorticoids to treat the hypoglycemia.
1] In the case, an operator initiated a concursus action seeking to resolve ownership interest in minerals underlying property on which it was operating. 31:59 (2017)). [24] 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] However, art.
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