Remove 2017 Remove IT Remove Royalty
article thumbnail

Louisiana Third Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Royalty and Other Claims Based Upon Prescription

The Energy Law

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.

article thumbnail

Louisiana Third Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Royalty and Other Claims Based Upon Prescription

The Energy Law

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.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Louisiana Second Circuit Provides Clarity on Production in Paying Quantities and Affirms Lease Cancellation Under Mineral Code Article 140 for Failure to Pay Royalties

The Energy Law

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.

article thumbnail

Texas Supreme Court: Shut-In Check Notations Don’t Rewrite Leases

Producer's Edge

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. The dispute arose from two leases containing identical shut-in royalty provisions. Taylor Properties , No. 23-1014, 2024 WL 5249490 [Tex.

article thumbnail

Who Owns the Void? Oral Arguments at SCOTX Regarding Underground Storage Rights

Producer's Edge

This case presents two critical questions: Who owns subsurface caverns created by salt mining operations, and How should in-kind royalties be calculated for salt production? 2017), where the Court emphasized that “the surface owner owns and controls the mass of earth undergirding the surface.” 3d 39 , 47 (Tex.

article thumbnail

When Contract Language Costs Millions: Court Strikes Down Post-Closing Assignment 'Corrections'

Producer's Edge

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.

article thumbnail

Who Owns the Empty Space? Texas Supreme Court Affirms Surface Ownership of Salt Caverns in Landmark Ruling

Producer's Edge

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?