Remove 2004 Remove Casing Remove Instrumentation
article thumbnail

Louisiana Second Circuit Addresses: (1) Creation of Mineral Servitudes Via Notarial Acts of Correction; (2) Obstacles Suspending the Prescription of Nonuse from Running Against Mineral Servitudes; and (3) Payment of Court Costs in Concursus Actions

The Energy Law

1] In the case, an operator initiated a concursus action seeking to resolve ownership interest in minerals underlying property on which it was operating. 20] The CUA permit was obtained on January 20, 2004. 20] The CUA permit was obtained on January 20, 2004. Flat River Farms, L.L.C. , 13] The Court then applied La.

Spud-in 40
article thumbnail

Louisiana’s Sabine River Authority Not Entitled To Sovereign Immunity

The Energy Law

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.,

Casing 52
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

arose from a 2004 mineral lease covering nearly 1,400 acres in Sections 9, 10, 15, 16, and 21, Township 15 North, Range 15 West, in Caddo Parish. [2] Gloria’s Ranch ultimately filed suit against Tauren, Cubic, EXCO, and Wells Fargo for their failure to provide a recordable instrument evidencing the expiration of the lease. 31:124, cmt.;

Royalty 40
article thumbnail

Louisiana Second Circuit Finds Holder of Mortgage Encumbering a Mineral Lease Solidarily Liable with Mineral Lessees for Damages Under the Louisiana Mineral Code

The Energy Law

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] 3] The Lease was executed in September 2004 and covered 1,390.25 4] $242,029.26

Royalty 40