2008 Casing Gas 
The Energy Law
FEBRUARY 20, 2009
08-233, 2008 WL 5158887 (La. Mineral, surface, and subsurface leases on the various properties have been granted to seven separate entities for oil and gas operations on the property. The case was then transferred to Vermillion Parish, Louisiana pursuant to exceptions filed by the defendants for improper venue.
The Energy Law
JULY 25, 2013
Holden EPA’s most recent NPDES regulations for stormwater permitting of oil and gas facilities were vacated by the Ninth Circuit in 2008 and new regulations have not been promulgated. The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) added language creating a permitting exemption for uncontaminated runoff from Oil and Gas operations.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The Energy Law
MAY 3, 2021
The tables turned again at the Texas Supreme Court, which ultimately held that the boundary stipulation was valid and that the defendants conclusively established their ratification defense, but the case is still ongoing. The parties signed the stipulation in August and September 2008, and it was subsequently recorded in the county records.
The Energy Law
NOVEMBER 24, 2009
the First Court of Appeals in Houston held that oil which had been severed and stored in tanks on site was personal property and thus was transferred by an assignment of the oil and gas property on which the tanks were located. To read the case, please go to [link] Merlon Texas, Inc., Emphasis by the court).
The Energy Law
MAY 3, 2021
The tables turned again at the Texas Supreme Court, which ultimately held that the boundary stipulation was valid and that the defendants conclusively established their ratification defense, but the case is still ongoing. The parties signed the stipulation in August and September 2008, and it was subsequently recorded in the county records.
The Energy Law
MARCH 12, 2008
06-31238, 2008 WL 588745 (5th Cir. 2008), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision to dismiss a qui tam action brought under the Federal Claims Act (FCA). He alleged that the defendants then received the benefit of continuing operations under a federal contract, the federal oil and gas lease.
The Energy Law
JUNE 30, 2015
13-0596 , the Supreme Court of Texas interpreted a natural gas-purchase contract and held that a producer was not required to share in the costs of compression, even though that compression helped yield a higher re-sale price. Kachina”) operates a natural gas gathering system, as well as a gas pipeline. Lillis, No.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
40 
Let's personalize your content