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
The casing pipe is mandatory in drilling operations as it has a lot of casing functions to prevent cave-in of unconsolidated formations, isolate problem zones, and many more. As mentioned before in our casing design guide, the selection of casing depends on many factors.
This case arises from a fatal accident on an icy, unlit stretch of highway near Amarillo, Texas. The Texas Supreme Court reviewed and reversed the judgment of the court of appeals and remanded the case for a new trial. A wrongful death case is no different in this regard. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.001 (12). 2d 607, 614 (Tex.
In doing so, the Third Circuit created an issue ripe for Louisiana Supreme Court decision. (“Justiss”) entered into a turnkey drilling contract to drill a deep oil well using intermediate casing purchased from Oil Country Tubular Co. In Justiss Oil Company, Inc. Oil Country Tubular Corp., and manufactured by North American Interpipe, Inc.
In most cases it prevents stagnation As I always say, It is not how many hits you have in baseball that counts. Regardless if you are a safety professional, a worker out in the field, or an executive, I appreciate you taking a small part of your day or month to read whats going on in the field of safety. In effect I am. Thats a win!
The Third Circuit’s opinion in this case is the culmination of a year-and-a-half-long discovery dispute. The Louisiana Third Circuit recently affirmed a trial court discovery ruling that allowed the defendant to design its own e-discovery protocol without input from plaintiffs. 6/28/23), –So.
12/19/07), the court addressed the payment of royalties and penalties under Mineral Code article 212.23(c) c) and concluded that plaintiff’s letters were insufficient to trigger the provisions of that article. Next, the court noted the dearth of reported cases involving Mineral Code articles 212.21-23 at *8 (citing La.
The first memo announced the reversal of OSHA’s April 10, 2020 policy that limited the requirement to track on-the-job cases of COVID-19 to health-care facilities, emergency response providers, and corrections facilities. The agency cautioned that recording a COVID-19 case does not necessarily mean the employer violated an OSHA standard.
Privacy Policy: By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry. Maersk Line, Limited, In Personam, and M/V Maersk Idaho , No. 3:19-CV-238, 2023 WL 113740 (S.D. 5, 2023). [2]
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. Hayes, et al.
Steib’s co-workers and six individuals deposed in unrelated asbestos cases that Plaintiffs argued established Mr. Steib’s exposure. The opinion reaffirms a plaintiff’s need for specific testimony in order to establish issues of fact necessary to defeat a motion for summary judgment in an asbestos exposure case. [1]
The Litel case began as a legacy lawsuit, in which Pioneer Natural Resources, Inc. Thereafter, the LDNR intervened in the Litel case, seeking recovery of emergency costs from Pioneer and Gary. 4/6/22), –So. 3d–, the Louisiana Third Circuit denied the LDNR’s claims for recovery of over 6.3 Lyon Well #1. with stopping the leak.
Louisiana appellate court unanimously dismisses cross-appeals in legacy case, finding that the trial court improperly designated partial summary judgment rulings as final under Article 1915 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure. In Spanish Lake Restoration, LLC v. Shell Oil Company, et al. , Rosenblum , 2004-1664 (La.
Additionally, a motion to recuse was filed to remove Justice Crain from the case. Justice Crain had been previously removed from a case involving the Talbot, Carmouche, and Marcello law firm; however, in this case, the Louisiana Supreme Court denied Plaintiff’s request, allowing Justice Crain to consider the writ application.
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).
Part I of this blog covers some basics about state and federal courts, explaining why the jurisdictional question of where a case will be decided is often contested. Federal Court “Removal” is the name for the process when a party transfers a case originally filed in a state court to a federal court. Only the court is different.
In May 2018, oil and gas industry defendants removed a docket of 42 cases alleging violations of Louisiana’s coastal zone management laws to federal court in the Eastern and Western Districts of Louisiana (“CZM cases”). Defendants removed Auster (and 11 other Western District CZM cases) based on federal officer jurisdiction (28 U.S.C.
On June 2, 2017 the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s judgment cancelling a mineral lease under Mineral Code article 140 and provided further clarity on a production in paying quantities analysis under Louisiana Mineral Code article 124. [1] 1] The dispute in Gloria’s Ranch, L.L.C. 035 cents per mcf.
I really enjoyed this article. There's actually a pretty strong case for "burning. There's actually a pretty strong case for "burning. It's common economic sense, touching on the distinction between wealth (or well-being) and GDP. Something that ought to be widely understood, but unfortunately isn't.
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.” This is the analysis the Court applied in the instant case of Noble House LLC v. Noble House then took this appeal to the Fifth Circuit.
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. The court provided three reasons in support of its holding.
The current case of the FSO Safer brings to light a practice that needs to stop. Craig Pirrong, a finance professor at the University of Houston is quoted in an article appearing. Craig Pirrong, a finance professor at the University of Houston is quoted in an article appearing.
Steib’s co-workers and six individuals deposed in unrelated asbestos cases that Plaintiffs argued established Mr. Steib’s exposure. The opinion reaffirms a plaintiff’s need for specific testimony in order to establish issues of fact necessary to defeat a motion for summary judgment in an asbestos exposure case. [1]
The LDNR subsequently applied for supervisory writs to the Louisiana Supreme Court, arguing that mandamus violates the sole authority of the legislature to appropriate funds to pay for judgments against the State under Louisiana Constitution article XII §10(C) and La. The Court then pointed to Louisiana Constitution article XII §10(C) and La.
1 the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that state law—and specifically in this case, Louisiana law—governs the applicable negligence standard and burden of proof for a pilot’s error. On December 4, 2023, in Marquette Transportation Co. Gulf-Inland, LLC v. Navigation Maritime Bulgare JSC, et al. , Balkan Navigation Ltd. 4 1 87 F.4th
Although the bill expressly provides that “[a] renewable energy lease is not a mineral lease,” the proposed legislation contains a number of provisions that are either identical or substantially similar to the Louisiana Mineral Code articles governing mineral leases. compare to La. Communications include firm news, insights, and events.
You can see this article to read more about this. Street lights are raised sources of lights that are lined up on a street to illuminate it. They are commonplace in every modern society and community today. Also, they add a particular feel and ambience to different locations where they are erected, making a city beautiful to behold at night.
Additionally, a motion to recuse was filed to remove Justice Crain from the case. Justice Crain had been previously removed from a case involving the Talbot, Carmouche, and Marcello law firm; however, in this case, the Louisiana Supreme Court denied Plaintiff’s request, allowing Justice Crain to consider the writ application.
On the case’s second trip to the Fifth Circuit, the court focused upon the theories of recovery articulated by the Plaintiffs. The court also rejected Plaintiffs’ breach of contract claims, finding no basis in the Civil Code articles on contracts for a disgorgement of profits. Read the opinion here.
On the case’s second trip to the Fifth Circuit, the court focused upon the theories of recovery articulated by the Plaintiffs. The court also rejected Plaintiffs’ breach of contract claims, finding no basis in the Civil Code articles on contracts for a disgorgement of profits. Read the opinion here.
That case is one of forty-two Coastal Zone Management Act (“CZMA”) cases that were removed to Federal court in May 2018. The cases were removed to Federal court by Defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Riverwood Production Co., 1442 (the federal officer removal statute) and 28 U.S.C.
In contrast to the majority, Chief Justice Weimer and Justice Crain opined that “serious” emotional distress means distress that is “severe, debilitating, and foreseeable,” analogizing the standard to that of NIED bystander damages under Louisiana Civil Code article 2315.6. [3] Communications include firm news, insights, and events.
1] In doing so, the Third Circuit affirmed the constitutional and statutory authority of the Tax Commission to correct assessment that, as in this case, did not properly reflect the fair market value of the pipeline system. In Enerfin Field Services v. Vernon Parish Board of Review , No. 22-740 (La.
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. Privacy Policy : By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry.
a case concerning Texas partnership law. Privacy Policy: By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry. Last week the Texas Supreme Court granted review in Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.
ExxonMobil removed the case to federal court arguing that the lawsuit involves “complex federal statutory, regulatory, and constitutional issues and frameworks,” which should supplant Massachusetts’ interpretation of climate issues. The majority of these cases have been brought under state nuisance laws.
Instead, BSEE decided to retain the current framework, under which BSEE’s position is that it may issue decommissioning orders to any or all jointly and severally liable parties in the chain of title on a case-by-case basis. 250.1700, et seq. . BSEE’s final rule can be found at 88 Fed. 23569 (April 18, 2023).
One of the Facility Defendants removed the case to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, arguing that complete diversity existed between all properly joined defendants and the Plaintiffs. 1] The Court found that remand was necessary in the case at issue because of the uncertainty of whether discretionary immunity under La.
The case is one of three major climate change lawsuits. In the other two cases, a Connecticut and a Mississippi case, the federal appeals courts reversed the district courts’ dismissal of the actions. For the full article, see [link]
Privacy Policy : By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry. Multiple environmental impact statements and ESA consultations have a occurred in conjunction with the project.
Privacy Policy: By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry. The court of appeal denied the plaintiff’s writ in a 2-1 decision. In support, it relied on Bozeman v. State , 03-1016 (La. 7/2/04), 879 So.2d 14-2279(La.
by April Rolen-Ogden This case involved a suit by an unleased landowner against an oil and gas unit operator seeking unpaid production proceeds. It is significant to note that the operator was not represented by counsel at trial, which may explain the ultimate outcome in this case.
If you're already a valued subscriber to one or both of our existing publications, then rest assured, you'll continue to receive the same high-quality case updates and insightful articles — now through our new ProducersEdge.law domain. This
The Texas Business Courts will potentially impact a wide range of cases, from high-value contract disputes to intricate corporate governance issues. What potential pros and cons may arise from submitting a case to the new Business Courts? How might existing agreements and future contracts be affected by this new forum?
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. The Texas Supreme Court recently released its opinion in Van Dyke v. Dils Co. ,
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