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
Louisiana Land and Exploration Co., In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. Iowa Production , landowners sued oil and gas companies for breach of a mineral lease. In 2013, the decision in State of Louisiana v. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co., This was all done in light of this Court’s 2013 La.
Since this blog’s post on production in paying quantities on January 26, 2016 , the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal rendered its latest decision on the subject in Middleton v. Specifically, courts must consider all relevant factors, not just profit, when determining whether production is in paying quantities. 50,300-CA (La.
The Eagle II case is the second case that arose between TRO-X, L.P. (“TRO-X”) Eastland 2013, pet. In Eagle II , TRO-X alleged that Eagle failed to pay TRO-X its share of income generated from production on the equitable interests. 19, 2021) (“ Eagle II ”). TRO-X”) and Eagle Oil & Gas Co. TRO-X, L.P. ,
The Eagle II case is the second case that arose between TRO-X, L.P. (“TRO-X”) Eastland 2013, pet. In Eagle II , TRO-X alleged that Eagle failed to pay TRO-X its share of income generated from production on the equitable interests. 19, 2021) (“ Eagle II ”). TRO-X”) and Eagle Oil & Gas Co. TRO-X, L.P. ,
Louisiana Land and Exploration Co., In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. Iowa Production , landowners sued oil and gas companies for breach of a mineral lease. In 2013, the decision in State of Louisiana v. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co., This was all done in light of this Court’s 2013 La.
The reorganization gave BSEE regulatory authority (PDF) over safety and environmental affairs for OCS exploration and production activities. 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 Violation In March 2012, BSEE conducted an inspection of ATP’s floating production platform facility, known as the ATP Innovator, while it was moored to the sea floor about 45 nautical miles offshore of southeastern Louisiana (about 125 miles south of New Orleans) and engaged in the production of oil and natural gas. 955 F.Supp.2d
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