This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In two companion cases, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided whether a federal district court could properly exercise jurisdiction over climate change suits brought against energy companies by cities and counties in California. In City of Oakland et al. BP PLC et al. 1442(a)(1).
Together, these developments will undoubtedly lead to more litigation and a higher cost of doing business on the Outer Continental Shelf. The number of civil penalty cases has risen gradually since 2009, with a sharp increase over 2013-2015. In 2013, the average penalty was $67,714 over 42 cases.
In 2013, NIOSH researchers published exposure assessment results for respirable crystalline silica in oil and gas extraction (OGE) workers performing hydraulic fracturing.
Previous Court Ruling In many cases alleging damage to property arising from historic oil and gas operations, the plaintiff was not the owner at the time of the alleged damage, but instead is the subsequent purchaser of the property at issue. 2013-2132 (La. In Eagle Pipe and Supply, Inc. Amerada Hess Corp. , 10-2267 (La.
is an issue that may differ from case to case depending on the content of a party’s notices, this decision provides another data point in an area of oil and gas law with significant consequences for operators in Louisiana. In addition, the April 17, 2018 letter also closely tracked La. While sufficient notice under La.
In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. In 2013, the decision in State of Louisiana v. After the LL&E I decision, the case went to trial in 2015. This was all done in light of this Court’s 2013 La. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co., 2020-00685 (La. 6/30/2021); — So. 3d — (“ LL&E II ”). [1].
By Jillian Marullo House Bill 788, signed into law on June 14, 2013, authorizes the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (“TCEQ”) to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases (“GHG”) “[t]o the extent that greenhouse gas emissions require authorization under federal law.” In July 2013, the D.C.
By Greg Johnson and Stephen Wiegand In a July 17, 2013 decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated a $6 million dollar penalty levied under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) against CITGO Petroleum Corporation (“CITGO”) and remanded the matter to the Western District of Louisiana for further consideration.
The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court dismissed their case under Rule 12(b)(6). 2] Here, this was not the case. 2013); Plaisance v. 2013); Plaisance v. On January 11, 2021, the Fifth Circuit panel affirmed. See Barker v. 3d 208, 224 (5th Cir.
By Bob Holden and Jillian Marullo On April 23, 2013, in a case of first impression, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the EPA’s veto authority under section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C.§ Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”). Mingo Logan Coal Co. EPA , 714 F.3d 3d 608 (D.C.
3d—, the Louisiana First Circuit recently reaffirmed well-settled principles regarding prescription and the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana legacy cases. In this case, Lexington Land sued Chevron U.S.A., This opinion reinforces several key concepts in legacy cases. 5/25/21), 2021 WL 2102932, —So.
B in a May 20, 2013 Louisiana Register Notice. 1280 (May 20, 2013). Additionally, measurement of condensable PM continues to be required in all cases for emissions of PM 10 and PM 2.5. LDEQ’s definition of “regulated NSR pollutant” is now consistent with the corrected federal definition found at 40 C.F.R. 51.166(b)(49).
McCarthy , Case No. In that case, the parties eventually settled, and EPA agreed in a consent decree to finalize RCRA Subtitle D coal ash regulations by a certain date. The lawsuit is styled as Environmental Integrity Project, et al. 1:16-cv-00842-JDB, and was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
3d—, the Louisiana First Circuit recently reaffirmed well-settled principles regarding prescription and the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana legacy cases. In this case, Lexington Land sued Chevron U.S.A., This opinion reinforces several key concepts in legacy cases. 5/25/21), 2021 WL 2102932, —So.
3d—, the Louisiana First Circuit recently reaffirmed well-settled principles regarding prescription and the subsequent purchaser doctrine in Louisiana legacy cases. In this case, Lexington Land sued Chevron U.S.A., This opinion reinforces several key concepts in legacy cases. 5/25/21), 2021 WL 2102932, —So.
This recent case [ MIECO, L.L.C. With these common strings, this case could have implications (small or large) for other similar pending disputes across the state. In the MEICO court’s view, that case “counsels strongly” against reading the word “prevent” to mean “make impossible.
By Lesley Foxhall Pietras On June 24, 2013, the U.S. The two consolidated cases the Supreme Court agreed to hear are EPA v. Supreme Court granted the petitions for writs of certiorari filed by the U.S. The CSAPR sets limits on sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from power plants in 28 upwind states in the eastern part of the country.
The Rule arbitrarily excludes pre-2013 low- and zero-emitting generation sources from being able to create emission reduction credits. The case is moving quickly. We will continue to provide updates as the case goes on. The Rule’s strategies for limiting carbon dioxide emissions are not what the Clean Air Act requires.
The Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week in a case that could substantially clarify, or even fundamentally reshape, the characterization and ownership of underground storage rights in Texas. The case was Myers-Woodward v. The case remains pending before the Texas Supreme Court on petition for review.
The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court dismissed their case under Rule 12(b)(6). 2] Here, this was not the case. 2013); Plaisance v. 2013); Plaisance v. On January 11, 2021, the Fifth Circuit panel affirmed. See Barker v. 3d 208, 224 (5th Cir.
In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. In 2013, the decision in State of Louisiana v. After the LL&E I decision, the case went to trial in 2015. This was all done in light of this Court’s 2013 La. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co., 2020-00685 (La. 6/30/2021); — So. 3d — (“ LL&E II ”). [1].
1] Prior to the Pennsylvania ruling, there were two seminal cases that have addressed the issue and reached conflicting results. The court found that an actionable trespass claim requires an injury and that the only claimed injury in this case—drainage of gas from beneath the plaintiff’s property—was barred by the rule of capture. [3]
Secretary Salazar originally intended the IRU’s functions to continue within the three new bureaus; however, as of fiscal year 2013, the IRU was operating only within BSEE (PDF). The Natural Resources Committee for the House of Representatives has questioned DOI about the IRU’s composition and activities. Richard Hastings (R-Wash.),
If used correctly, TAR can result in drastic savings for clients in document-intensive cases and provide more accurate results. Competence includes at least a basic understanding of TAR in order to evaluate the appropriate document review method for each case and implement a protocol for electronically stored information. Model Rule 1.4
This case boasts a lengthy and varied procedural history, but the opinion at issue came after a jury found Unocal responsible for “environmental damage” as defined under Act 312 and awarded $3.5 Act 312 provides that any limited admission is admissible in evidence at trial and Unocal’s limited admission was presented to the jury in this case.
In January 2016, Judge Haik retired from the bench and the case was transferred to Judge Drell. The result is consistent, however, with the EPA’s 2014-2018 Strategic Plan of focusing on large cases, and its recent pattern of pursuing fewer enforcement actions with larger resolutions. Adm’r of E.P.A. CITGO Petroleum Corp., Year in Rev.
In this case, Tongli Shipping Pte. Property is defined broadly and includes traditional maritime assets, but also other tangible and intangible assets, including bank accounts, accounts receivable, and debts. Tongli”) time chartered the cargo ship M/V Orient Rise to Bunge S.A. Grand China Shipping Dev. 3d 488, 495 (2d Cir.
July 12, 2013) (pdf). In the recent ruling, the Third Circuit held that it was reasonable for EPA to interpret Section 126(b) to be an “independent mechanism for enforcing interstate pollution control,” thereby giving EPA authority to directly regulate a specific source in an upwind state. See GenOn REMA, LLC v. 12-1022, slip op.
While not particularly groundbreaking, Middleton does provide further guidance to mineral lessees and litigators with respect to the relevant factors and time period considered in a paying quantities case. Specifically, courts must consider all relevant factors, not just profit, when determining whether production is in paying quantities.
In a case sure to be used as a sword by many defendants in the prevalent NORM (naturally occurring radioactive material) litigation in Louisiana and elsewhere, Patricia Lennie, et al. In doing so, the Fifth Circuit distinguished a prior case, Lester v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, et al., Exxon Mobil Corp., 10-743 (La. 5/31/12), 102 So.3d
If used correctly, TAR can result in drastic savings for clients in document-intensive cases and provide more accurate results. Competence includes at least a basic understanding of TAR in order to evaluate the appropriate document review method for each case and implement a protocol for electronically stored information. Model Rule 1.4
In this case, CT Land and Cattle and Cattle Co., LLC sought to enforce a provision in a 1948 mineral lease requiring Unitex WI, LLC and Unitex Oil and Gas, LLC (Unitex) to bury pipelines on the ranch land surface CT Land acquired in 2013.
The Eagle II case is the second case that arose between TRO-X, L.P. (“TRO-X”) Eastland 2013, pet. To establish the res judicata defense, a defendant must demonstrate that the legal injury occurred before the decision was made in the first case ( i.e. , the claim was ripe). 19, 2021) (“ Eagle II ”). TRO-X, L.P. ,
2] In the Citgo case, the Fifth Circuit dove into these uncertain regulatory waters head on. 2] In the Citgo case, the Fifth Circuit dove into these uncertain regulatory waters head on. . § 703(a); 16 U.S.C. § A violation of the MBTA results in a fine up to $15,000 and six-months imprisonment. 65844 (Nov.
provide additional insured coverage with limits of “at least $5 million”), it is conceivable that a different ultimate outcome may have been reached in the case. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Co. Aspen Underwriting Ltd. 13-51027 (5th Cir. Had the additional insured wording in the underlying contract in Ironshore Specialty been broader (e.g.,
According to the complaint (PDF) DOJ filed in February 2013, Cleartron ZB-103 was routinely “injected into the outfall pipe to mask oil sheen on the ocean surface resulting from ATP’s discharge of wastewater containing quantities of oil in excess of its NPDES permit limit.” . § See United States v. ATP Oil & Gas Corp. , 955 F.Supp.2d
In our case study, we achieved reduction in operational costs by 5% ($2.5 You can trigger AWS Glue periodically or on-demand to process your raw telemetry data into the format needed for downstream analytic use cases. 2013 setting. million cost reduction in the first year) along with its associated carbon emissions.
The Eagle II case is the second case that arose between TRO-X, L.P. (“TRO-X”) Eastland 2013, pet. To establish the res judicata defense, a defendant must demonstrate that the legal injury occurred before the decision was made in the first case ( i.e. , the claim was ripe). 19, 2021) (“ Eagle II ”). TRO-X, L.P. ,
1] In the case, the Plaintiffs granted a mineral lease to the Defendant-Lessee that provided for a 1/5 royalty in 2009. [2] 1] In the case, the Plaintiffs granted a mineral lease to the Defendant-Lessee that provided for a 1/5 royalty in 2009. [2] Anglo-Dutch Energy, L.L.C. , Anglo-Dutch Energy, L.L.C. ,
2013), 124 So. La 2016) (finding that only unleased mineral owners are entitled to 103.1 reports from a unit operator or producer), but see XXI Oil & Gas, LLC v. Hilcorp Energy Co., 13-410 (La. 3d 530 (hereinafter referred to “ XXI Oil & Gas I ”); XXI Oil & Gas, LLC v. Hilcorp Energy Co., 16-269 (La. 3d at 534-35. [3]
The Proposed Regulations Following a series of train accidents in 2013, and a number of petitions asking for more stringent railroad safety regulations, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) on September 6, 2013.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content