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
On February 3, 2021, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s ruling that granted a summary judgment motion finding plaintiffs failed to submit specific evidence of asbestos exposure necessary to create a genuine issue of material fact. Lamorak Ins. 20-0424 (La. In 2018, Charles Steib (“Mr.
In doing so, the Court reaffirmed the employment-at-will doctrine, and its decision will likely be cited in many other types of employment law cases, including those asserting wrongful termination claims. It will also be useful to employers in a variety of other cases where their personnel decisions are challenged.
Now the case is before the Texas Supreme Court, with a recently submitted amicus brief containing the argument that could turn the tides back in the lessees’ favor. The lessors won in the trial court; the court of appeals affirmed. Factual Background and Issue. New Developments Before the Texas Supreme Court. See BlueStone Nat. 3d 380 (Tex.
On February 3, 2021, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s ruling that granted a summary judgment motion finding plaintiffs failed to submit specific evidence of asbestos exposure necessary to create a genuine issue of material fact. Lamorak Ins. 20-0424 (La. In 2018, Charles Steib (“Mr.
District Court for the Southern District of Texas in November of 2021. Under this doctrine, “a court may decline to exercise its jurisdiction and dismiss a case that is otherwise properly before it so that the case can be adjudicated in another forum.” The case is Noble House, L.L.C. 22-20281, 2023 WL 3168603 (5th Cir.
BOEM approved the Construction and Operations Plan for the Vineyard Wind Project in July 2021, approximately 12 years after BOEM began evaluating the site for wind energy development. The plaintiffs’ arguments centered mostly on the project’s impact on an endangered species, the North Atlantic right whale.
On June 30, 2021, the Louisiana Supreme Court issued an opinion redefining the nature of available damages and the “actual, statutorily permitted role of the jury in Act 312 remediation lawsuits.” 6/30/2021); — So. In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. State of Louisiana v. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co.,
Updated from May 18, 2021 post. On May 17, 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in the climate change litigation affecting the fossil fuel industry. 1447(d), a provision that specifically authorizes interlocutory appeal of an order remanding a case removed pursuant to the federal officer removal statute. .
Updated from May 18, 2021 post. On May 17, 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in the climate change litigation affecting the fossil fuel industry. 1447(d), a provision that specifically authorizes interlocutory appeal of an order remanding a case removed pursuant to the federal officer removal statute. .
This requirement was to go into effect on August 1, 2021. With Louisiana’s case dismissed, the TED requirements for shrimp skimmer trawl vessels 40 feet and greater in length are likely to remain in place. Louisiana argued that the TEDs were unnecessary in state waters and would economically harm its shrimp fisheries.
On June 29, 2021, the United States Supreme Court, in a 5-4 vote, held that a natural gas company’s right to condemn property for a pipeline under the Natural Gas Act includes the right to condemn state-owned property. In this case, PennEast sought to exercise the federal eminent domain power bestowed upon it by the Natural Gas Act (NGA).
527 (1962) requires courts hearing maintenance and cure cases to construe disputed medical evidence in the seaman’s favor. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit held that Vaughan does not require courts hearing maintenance and cure cases to construe all disputed medical evidence in the seaman’s favor. Supreme Court holding in Vaughan v.
On July 1, 2021, the Internal Revenue Service published Revenue Ruling 2021-13 , which provides guidance on three important issues related to the income tax credit for carbon oxide sequestration found in section 45Q of the Internal Revenue Code.
2021) (“Henry Schein II”). The distributor argued that the inclusion of its request for injunctive relief brought the case under the carve-out in the arbitration provision. This is now the second time this case has been before the Supreme Court on issues of arbitrability. Henry Schein, Inc. Archer & White Sales, Inc.,
20-30300, 2021 WL 96168, a three-judge panel of the U.S. The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). On January 11, 2021, the Fifth Circuit panel affirmed. 2021 WL 96168 at *2.
In support of that notion, the Court cited the 1957 Texas Supreme Court case Garrett v. Another possible example, though not noted by the Court, can be seen in a case currently pending before the Eastland Court of Appeals: PetroLegacy Energy II, LLC v. Eastland June 1, 2021). Dils Co. , 2d 904 (Tex. Element Petroleum Props.,
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. 2020-0622 (La.
Sensing that the Department of Revenue may lose the Smith International case, the legislature used this Act to prohibit refunds for taxpayers who previously paid late payment penalties but would not owe them under the holding of Smith International.
20-30300, 2021 WL 96168, a three-judge panel of the U.S. The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). On January 11, 2021, the Fifth Circuit panel affirmed. 2021 WL 96168 at *2.
24, 2021), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit addressed a question that has increasingly become a sticking point in Louisiana “legacy” cases: whether claims brought under a Louisiana citizen suit provision for alleged violations of state environmental regulations can be heard in federal court. 20-30224 (5th Cir.
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. 2020-0622 (La.
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. 2020-0622 (La.
2021) (“Henry Schein II”). The distributor argued that the inclusion of its request for injunctive relief brought the case under the carve-out in the arbitration provision. This is now the second time this case has been before the Supreme Court on issues of arbitrability. Henry Schein, Inc. Archer & White Sales, Inc.,
Maintaining that the plaintiff qualified as a seaman under controlling Fifth Circuit precedent but questioning that precedent in light of Supreme Court case law, the panel urged the Fifth Circuit to review the case en banc. Both plaintiffs were seaman under the nature test, and the panel could not distinguish Sanchez’s case.
Maintaining that the plaintiff qualified as a seaman under controlling Fifth Circuit precedent but questioning that precedent in light of Supreme Court case law, the panel urged the Fifth Circuit to review the case en banc. Both plaintiffs were seaman under the nature test, and the panel could not distinguish Sanchez’s case.
10] While the rule does not specify whether the new limits apply retroactively to oil spills that occur before the effective date, case law indicates that the change will be prospective only. [11] 21] These efforts usually fail, but occasionally—as in the case of MORRO CASTLE and now CONCEPTION—they succeed, even if only partially.
The subsequent purchaser doctrine has been litigated extensively in Louisiana legacy cases involving claims for oilfield remediation. Energen Resources Corporation , 2021-0290 (La. 10/4/21), 2021 WL 4548529, —So. In Louisiana Wetlands, LLC v.
On June 30, 2021, the Louisiana Supreme Court issued an opinion redefining the nature of available damages and the “actual, statutorily permitted role of the jury in Act 312 remediation lawsuits.” 6/30/2021); — So. In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. State of Louisiana v. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co.,
Sensing that the Department of Revenue may lose the Smith International case, the legislature used this Act to prohibit refunds for taxpayers who previously paid late payment penalties but would not owe them under the holding of Smith International.
The second safe harbor permits a taxpayer to deduct its eligible expenses on its 2021 tax return so long as in 2021 the taxpayer irrevocably decides not to seek forgiveness or its application for forgiveness is denied. The first safe harbor permits taxpayers to take these deductions on an original or amended 2020 tax return.
24, 2021), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit addressed a question that has increasingly become a sticking point in Louisiana “legacy” cases: whether claims brought under a Louisiana citizen suit provision for alleged violations of state environmental regulations can be heard in federal court. 20-30224 (5th Cir.
There are few cases interpreting these statutes. Plaintiff further argued that Miller was inapplicable because the unleased owner in that case “simply demanded the operator identify whatever interest the owner may have in any of the operator’s units.” 1] 2021 WL 956079 (W.D. 5, 2021). [2] and the penalty imposed in La.
There are few cases interpreting these statutes. Plaintiff further argued that Miller was inapplicable because the unleased owner in that case “simply demanded the operator identify whatever interest the owner may have in any of the operator’s units.” 1] 2021 WL 956079 (W.D. 5, 2021). [2] and the penalty imposed in La.
19-0459, 2021 WL 936175 (Tex. While the Court is no stranger to interpreting (and often muddling) the familiar royalty clause interpretation questions surrounding the first issue, in a case of first impression, the Court also analyzed the breadth of a lease’s free-use clause.
19-0459, 2021 WL 936175 (Tex. While the Court is no stranger to interpreting (and often muddling) the familiar royalty clause interpretation questions surrounding the first issue, in a case of first impression, the Court also analyzed the breadth of a lease’s free-use clause.
18-0983, 2021 WL 1045723, at *1 (Tex. 19, 2021) (“ Eagle II ”). The Eagle II case is the second case that arose between TRO-X, L.P. (“TRO-X”) 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).
3d —, 2021 WL115917, the Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Comstock Oil & Gas, LLC, emphasizing not only the importance of the language of Comstock’s Master Service Agreement (“MSA”), but the absence of any contractual or actual operational control over the activities of its independent contractor. In McDaniel v R.J.’s
3d —, 2021 WL115917, the Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Comstock Oil & Gas, LLC, emphasizing not only the importance of the language of Comstock’s Master Service Agreement (“MSA”), but the absence of any contractual or actual operational control over the activities of its independent contractor.
See 2021 WL 1432222 (Tex. 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 case then proceeded to trial on Concho’s counterclaims.
See 2021 WL 1432222 (Tex. 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 case then proceeded to trial on Concho’s counterclaims.
The second safe harbor permits a taxpayer to deduct its eligible expenses on its 2021 tax return so long as in 2021 the taxpayer irrevocably decides not to seek forgiveness or its application for forgiveness is denied. The first safe harbor permits taxpayers to take these deductions on an original or amended 2020 tax return.
In the world of oil and gas, there are a lot of companies with debt maturities coming due in 2020 or 2021 ( see this article from the Wall Street Journal discussing the $120 billion debt wall these companies will face through 2023), and oil prices have been below the break-even point for many drilling sites.
There are few cases interpreting these statutes. Plaintiff further argued that Miller was inapplicable because the unleased owner in that case “simply demanded the operator identify whatever interest the owner may have in any of the operator’s units.” 1] 2021 WL 956079 (W.D. 5, 2021). [2] and the penalty imposed in La.
19-0459, 2021 WL 936175 (Tex. While the Court is no stranger to interpreting (and often muddling) the familiar royalty clause interpretation questions surrounding the first issue, in a case of first impression, the Court also analyzed the breadth of a lease’s free-use clause. Factual and Procedural Background.
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