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 first five Plaquemines Parish Coastal Zone Management Act (“CZMA”) cases to be set for trial have been chosen. Equitable Petroleum Corporation, et al. Equitable Petroleum Corporation, et al. The Plaintiffs selected Parish of Plaquemines v. Rozel Operating Company, et al. Parish of Plaquemines v. and Parish of Plaquemines v.
Parsons”) from 1975 through 1977 when he worked on the initial construction of Marathon Petroleum Company LP’s (“Marathon”) oil refinery in Garyville, Louisiana. 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.
In a decision issued today, the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal issued the first appellate court opinion addressing the procedure for approval of settlements in cases governed by Act 312 (La. Riceland Petroleum Corp., Having no objection to settlement in this case, the trial court correctly approved the settlement.
Parsons”) from 1975 through 1977 when he worked on the initial construction of Marathon Petroleum Company LP’s (“Marathon”) oil refinery in Garyville, Louisiana. 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.
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. Element Petroleum Props., Dils Co. , 2d 904 (Tex. 11-21-00103-CV (Tex.
LP, and New Dominion, LLC moved to dismiss the case on several grounds. In this case, the court noted that the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (“OCC”) is vested with exclusive authority to regulate injection/disposal wells. Second, the court dismissed the case under the “primary jurisdiction” doctrine.
On appeal, the court reversed the dismissal and remanded the case to the trial court. Goodrich Petroleum Co., The appellate court found that genuine issues of fact existed with regard to whether the cattle dip was dangerous per se. In reaching this conclusion, the court found that the defendant’s reliance on LeJeune Bros.,
the Third Circuit not only provides yet another example of the uniform application of the doctrine in cases involving mineral rights under Louisiana law, but expressly and thoroughly rejects the numerous arguments on which plaintiffs-landowners have continued to rely. Goodrich Petroleum Co. BP America Production Company, et al. ,
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.
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.
The Parish of Plaquemines amended its petitions in two of the Coastal Zone Management Act (“CZMA”) cases on June 19, 2017. Prior to the amendment of the petitions, Judge Clement sustained Defendants’ Exceptions of Vagueness in the two cases, namely: The Parish of Plaquemines v. Equitable Petroleum Corporation, et al.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its final Subpart W rule to cover petroleum and natural gas facilities under the agency’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Program. The original Subpart W rule for petroleum and natural gas facilities was proposed in March 2010.
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.
District Court Judge Dee Drell (Western District, LA) recently denied a motion to alter or amend the Court’s judgment against CITGO Petroleum Corp.– CITGO Petroleum Corp., In January 2016, Judge Haik retired from the bench and the case was transferred to Judge Drell. CITGO Petroleum Corp., Adm’r of E.P.A. Adm’r of E.P.A.
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.
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.
In what may appropriately be called a “swing and a miss”, the Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio has rejected plaintiffs’ attempt to avoid the need for medical expert testimony in a toxic tort case by pleading damages for “symptoms of discomfort” instead of disease. Aruba Petroleum Inc., Marathon Oil Corp , et al., at Law No.
denied), IP Petroleum Co., denied), and Abraxas Petroleum Corp. The Texas Supreme Court stated that those cases all involved interpreting the exculpatory clause language of either the 1977 or 1982 A.A.P.L. Long Trusts , 134 S.W.3d 3d 267 (Tex. Tyler 2003, pet. Wevanco Energy, L.L.C. , 3d 888 (Tex. Houston [1st Dist.]
Phillips Petroleum Co. , The Bowden case involved claims against Phillips Petroleum company in connection with its natural gas marketing through affiliate companies. In Bowden v. 03-0824 (Feb. 15, 2008), the Texas Supreme Court again addressed the propriety of class actions for gas royalty claims.
The statute is designed to promote quick, efficient cleanup and internalize costs within the petroleum industry. These types of damages, however, have long been prohibited under the general maritime law (the default body of federal common law governing maritime cases) under the familiar Robins Dry Dock rule.
Environmental Protection Agency , the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s policy limiting the reach of the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Summit Petroleum Corp. For more on this decision, see our previous blog entry here. For more on the Summit directive, see our previous blog entry here.
In a recent case, the Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal held that processors must also account for gas volume diverted to gas lift operations. Generally, oil and gas production facilities have accounted for volume losses under the concept of “Fuel, Flare & Losses.” In Red Willow Offshore, LLC v. Statewide Order No.
4] Paying quantities cases usually focus on what expenses constitute “operating expenses.” “Operating expenses”—or “lifting expenses” as they are sometimes referred—are “ordinary, recurring expenses” that are attributable to the expense of production, after the well is drilled and completed. [5] McKinney , 545 So. 2d 1216, 1220 (La.
Citgo Petroleum Corp., See Standards of Performance for VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery Wastewater Systems, 40 C.F.R. §§ 60.690 to 699 (“NSPS Subpart QQQ”). 2] In the Citgo case, the Fifth Circuit dove into these uncertain regulatory waters head on. Background The U.S. United States v. 14-40128, 2015 U.S. 4, 2015).
The First Court of Appeals initially reversed, but on rehearing withdrew its opinion and affirmed, basing its decision on the trial testimony of a petroleum engineer that no minerals were being extracted from beneath the Hegar Tract by the well located on the Richardson Tract.
The Court reached this holding based on the wording of the applicable JOAs, which were both based on the American Association of Petroleum Landmen Model Form Operating Agreement 610-1982. —Houston [14th] 2009, no pet. In XTO Energy, Smith Production Inc.
Safer Technology and Alternatives Analysis: EPA is mandating consideration of potentially safer technology and alternatives as part of the RMP-required PHA for Program 3 processes in the following industries: petroleum and coal products manufacturing, chemical manufacturing, and paper manufacturing.
The Order specifically excludes businesses identified as critical to infrastructure, including oil and refining, and manufacturers, distributors, and supply chain companies producing and supplying products and services for industries such as energy, petroleum, and fuel. This issue remains fluid at this time.
Background The Keystone Pipeline is a system of petroleum pipelines designed to transport crude oil from fields in Alberta, Canada and ultimately terminating at refineries on the U.S The outcome of this case could have a significant impact on his strategy going forward. [1] Constitution. Gulf Coast. 2] Texas, et al. 2] Texas, et al.
The Keystone Pipeline is a system of petroleum pipelines designed to transport crude oil from fields in Alberta, Canada and ultimately terminating at refineries on the U.S The outcome of this case could have a significant impact on his strategy going forward. [1] Constitution. Background. Gulf Coast. 2] Texas, et al. 2] Texas, et al.
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