Remove 2009 Remove Instrumentation Remove Operator
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

4] In 2007, Fossil Operating, Inc. Fossil”), with whom Tauren contracted to conduct operations on the property, drilled and completed wells on the leased property in Sections 9, 10, and 16. [5] 5] Chesapeake Operating, Inc. Gloria’s Ranch sent a letter dated December 3, 2009 to Tauren, Cubic, EXCO, and Wells Fargo. [8]

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

The mineral lessees were required to provide the mortgagee with quarterly and annual financial statements reflecting their financial condition, reserve reports showing projections of further net income from the mortgaged properties, and sales and production reports which included the actual revenue and operating expenses of the wells.

Royalty 40
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 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

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
article thumbnail

Louisiana’s Sabine River Authority Not Entitled To Sovereign Immunity

The Energy Law

7] The Fifth Circuit noted that even though the SRA-L was made part of the umbrella of the executive branch via its placement in the Department of Transportation and Development after its creation, it maintained substantial control over its operations. 2009) (citing McCarthy ex rel. Caremark, Inc., 3d 655, 658 (5th Cir. 4] Voyt v.

Casing 52