The Energy Law

MARCH 31, 2021

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. after deductions), resulting in lower royalty payments for the royalty owners.

Royalty 52

Royalty Gas Oil Downstream 52

The Energy Law

MARCH 31, 2021

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. after deductions), resulting in lower royalty payments for the royalty owners.

Royalty 40

Royalty Gas Oil Downstream 40

The Energy Law

MARCH 31, 2021

Free-Use Clause and Further Interprets Conflicting Royalty Clause Provisions The Texas Supreme Court recently issued its anticipated decision in BlueStone Natural Resources II, LLC v. For almost a decade, the original lessee to the agreements never subtracted post-production costs from the royalty owners’ royalty payments.

Royalty 52

Royalty Gas Oil Downstream 52

The Energy Law

MARCH 11, 2020

Last year, in another dispute over who should bear the cost of decommissioning offshore facilities, the Southern District of Texas held that a former sub-assignee of offshore operating rights was entitled to equitable subrogation from the record title owner and initial assignor. UNOCAL also reserved a 3% overriding royalty.

Royalty 52

Royalty E&P Offshore E&A 52

The Energy Law

MARCH 30, 2017

In Petro-Chem Operating Co., 1] In the case, an operator initiated a concursus action seeking to resolve ownership interest in minerals underlying property on which it was operating. 21] Prior to spudding the well, the operator faced weather delays and was required to obtain a CUA permit. [22] Flat River Farms, L.L.C. ,

Spud-in 40

Spud-in Operator IT E&A 40