The Energy Law

JANUARY 12, 2017

the Third Circuit addressed the question of whether or not a mineral lessee must pay its lessor full lease-basis royalties for production undertaken during the effective period of a conditional allowable but prior to the effective date of a unit order. [1] Anglo-Dutch Energy, L.L.C. , Anglo-Dutch Energy, L.L.C. , Anglo-Dutch Energy, L.L.C. ,

Royalty 40

Royalty IT Gas Operator 40

The Energy Law

SEPTEMBER 23, 2008

Title I addresses the existing moratoria, future OCS access, exploration, production and royalty questions. per MMBtu, unless lease royalties were renegotiated with the Secretary , imposes Conservation of Resources Fee on nonproducing lease acreage of $3.75 House of Representatives passed Speaker Pelosi’s Energy Bill, H.R.

Royalty 40

Royalty Energy Energy Offshore 40

Producer's Edge

NOVEMBER 1, 2024

This case presents two critical questions: Who owns subsurface caverns created by salt mining operations, and How should in-kind royalties be calculated for salt production? ” The Fifth Circuit, applying Texas law in  Dunn-McCampbell Royalty Interest, Inc. —San Antonio 2013, no pet.) 3d 39 , 47 (Tex.

Royalty 52

Royalty Royalty Interest Casing Oil 52

Producer's Edge

JANUARY 27, 2025

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 lease provided for a royalty calculated based on the “market value at the well.” In this case, CT Land and Cattle and Cattle Co.,

Royalty 52

Royalty Pipeline Gas IT 52

The Energy Law

APRIL 19, 2021

Eastland 2013, pet. Several years later, Eagle purchased several leases and sold them to Chesapeake Exploration, LLC (“Chesapeake”), reserving an overriding royalty interest and a back-in working interest (the “Interests”). When the suit went to trial, the leases subject to the Chesapeake sale had not generated any royalty income.

Royalty 52

Royalty Exploration and Production IT Casing 52

The Energy Law

APRIL 19, 2021

Eastland 2013, pet. Several years later, Eagle purchased several leases and sold them to Chesapeake Exploration, LLC (“Chesapeake”), reserving an overriding royalty interest and a back-in working interest (the “Interests”). When the suit went to trial, the leases subject to the Chesapeake sale had not generated any royalty income.

Exploration and Production 40

Exploration and Production Royalty IT Oil 40

The Energy Law

NOVEMBER 7, 2014

Recently, when there was talk about Houston-based ATP Oil and Gas’ (ATP) legal problems, it was inevitably about its bankruptcy and its effort to bring the overriding royalty interests it had conveyed back into the bankrupt estate as debt instruments. See United States v. ATP Oil & Gas Corp. , 955 F.Supp.2d 2d 616 (E.D. See 40 C.F.R.

Offshore 40

Offshore Exploration and Production Oil Government 40